WCSPlease, check out polls and Husky's "State of Battle.net 2.0" video after reading interview.
The video has kittens!
I thought this was interesting as earlier Blizzard interviews had made it seem like this was right on the docket. And I know it wasnt just me that arrived at this conclusion. In many of the BNET threads their are usually several people talking about how Blizzard is going to add things like chat and cross realm soon. Hopefully the people will see that the full interview has a lot of new info.
Especially if you pay attention to just what Blizzard is...and isnt saying.
Also note that if you dont want Blizzard to share your info with third parties you have to email them.
Excerpt of the Frank Pearce Interview
A special thanks to Incgamer for this incredibly indepth and revealing interview.
There are many Europeans that have loads of American friends, and have a problem finding matches with Americans. I know you've already promised to bridge this divide...
[Bob Colayco: That's not the case.]
No, it'll be structured very similarly to World of Warcraft, where you've got the European region and players matched against the other players within their region.
[BC: We haven't promised anything like that. That's something we'll look into, but I just wanted to jump in and clarify that.]
But you're not excluding the possibility – you're just saying there are no current plans for it?
There are no current plans for it, and if you're a European player and you've got friends that are in another region that you want to be able to connect with, we definitely want to support that. It might mean that you have to access it through the US client, but those facilities will definitely be available in terms of, if you want the US client, go to the US website, download the US client.
So I can use my same account?
No.
So I need to buy two clients, that's what you're saying?
Yeah.
But I can have two of them in my Battle.net account?
You'd have an EU Battle.net account, and a US Battle.net account.
And that wouldn't be against the Terms of Service or End User License Agreement?
No. I'm pretty sure that's not against the TOS or EULA, but you'd be subject to the terms of the EULA for the region in which you're playing.
Another thing I thought you'd promised was chat rooms within Battle.net...
Nope. No plans for specific chat rooms at this time. You'll be able to open up chats direct with your friends, and when we add clans and groups there'll be chats for your clans and groups, but no specific plans for chat rooms right now. Do you really want chat rooms?
Loads of people within the community are wanting Looking For Group chat rooms, and that sort of thing.
Well, if we've done our job right in terms of the matchmaking service, then hopefully they won't feel like they'll need it for that service.
With the whole divide thing, though, Australians have ended up with the south-east Asia region. They've been wondering why you'd choose to do that, as obviously there'll be primarily non-English people playing with them.
That's an interesting challenge for us, because we want to make sure that the connectivity to the servers is such that the game experience is not impacted by a high-latency connection, and the latency between Australia and New Zealand to the servers in the US was such that we felt we would be able to deliver a better gaming experience by using their servers in south-east Asia.
You guys aren't the first people to do this, as this has happened recently with another game. Generally, this seems to be the problem with the Australasian reason. Is that across the board? Do you think that's the reason?
I can't speak on behalf of any other game developers, but definitely for us. A high-latency connection to the servers for StarCraft 2 is going to impact the game experience.
Is there going to be any kind of work to resolve that issue, to get them onto an English-speaking server of some description?
You know, it depends on the technology infrastructure provided by the telecommunications providers. It's something that we'll be constantly evaluating and looking at. In an ideal world, the Blizzard gaming community would be unified in one global region, but the technology's just not there yet. Ten years ago, we weren't making 3D games. Hopefully, in the same way that we're making 3D games today and we weren't ten years ago, down the road the connectivity in terms of the internet will be such that we can bring everyone together in a unified community, but it's just not possible right now. That's the ideal world.
[BC: The other thing is that the Asian players are playing on an English client, so they should be able to speak enough English to communicate a "gg" or "attack now," "help." Singapore is an English speaking country, the Philippines is an English-speaking country...]
Hong Kong.
[BC: It's not like it's going to be one Australian surrounded by 500,000 Thai people. There's going to be plain English spoken.]
Plus, isn't StarCraft 2 the universal language of RTSes? How much English do you need to speak to communicate with your opponent and kick his ass? [Laughs]
[Bob Colayco: That's not the case.]
No, it'll be structured very similarly to World of Warcraft, where you've got the European region and players matched against the other players within their region.
[BC: We haven't promised anything like that. That's something we'll look into, but I just wanted to jump in and clarify that.]
But you're not excluding the possibility – you're just saying there are no current plans for it?
There are no current plans for it, and if you're a European player and you've got friends that are in another region that you want to be able to connect with, we definitely want to support that. It might mean that you have to access it through the US client, but those facilities will definitely be available in terms of, if you want the US client, go to the US website, download the US client.
So I can use my same account?
No.
So I need to buy two clients, that's what you're saying?
Yeah.
But I can have two of them in my Battle.net account?
You'd have an EU Battle.net account, and a US Battle.net account.
And that wouldn't be against the Terms of Service or End User License Agreement?
No. I'm pretty sure that's not against the TOS or EULA, but you'd be subject to the terms of the EULA for the region in which you're playing.
Another thing I thought you'd promised was chat rooms within Battle.net...
Nope. No plans for specific chat rooms at this time. You'll be able to open up chats direct with your friends, and when we add clans and groups there'll be chats for your clans and groups, but no specific plans for chat rooms right now. Do you really want chat rooms?
Loads of people within the community are wanting Looking For Group chat rooms, and that sort of thing.
Well, if we've done our job right in terms of the matchmaking service, then hopefully they won't feel like they'll need it for that service.
With the whole divide thing, though, Australians have ended up with the south-east Asia region. They've been wondering why you'd choose to do that, as obviously there'll be primarily non-English people playing with them.
That's an interesting challenge for us, because we want to make sure that the connectivity to the servers is such that the game experience is not impacted by a high-latency connection, and the latency between Australia and New Zealand to the servers in the US was such that we felt we would be able to deliver a better gaming experience by using their servers in south-east Asia.
You guys aren't the first people to do this, as this has happened recently with another game. Generally, this seems to be the problem with the Australasian reason. Is that across the board? Do you think that's the reason?
I can't speak on behalf of any other game developers, but definitely for us. A high-latency connection to the servers for StarCraft 2 is going to impact the game experience.
Is there going to be any kind of work to resolve that issue, to get them onto an English-speaking server of some description?
You know, it depends on the technology infrastructure provided by the telecommunications providers. It's something that we'll be constantly evaluating and looking at. In an ideal world, the Blizzard gaming community would be unified in one global region, but the technology's just not there yet. Ten years ago, we weren't making 3D games. Hopefully, in the same way that we're making 3D games today and we weren't ten years ago, down the road the connectivity in terms of the internet will be such that we can bring everyone together in a unified community, but it's just not possible right now. That's the ideal world.
[BC: The other thing is that the Asian players are playing on an English client, so they should be able to speak enough English to communicate a "gg" or "attack now," "help." Singapore is an English speaking country, the Philippines is an English-speaking country...]
Hong Kong.
[BC: It's not like it's going to be one Australian surrounded by 500,000 Thai people. There's going to be plain English spoken.]
Plus, isn't StarCraft 2 the universal language of RTSes? How much English do you need to speak to communicate with your opponent and kick his ass? [Laughs]
Source: Full interview on incgamers.com. Note that there is video footage of some of the questions in this interview on their site.
http://www.incgamers.com/Interviews/270/blizzards-frank-pearce-interview
Featured Polls
Poll: Do you like the direction BNET 2.0 is taking?
No (10249)
95%
Yes (595)
5%
10844 total votes
Yes (595)
10844 total votes
Your vote: Do you like the direction BNET 2.0 is taking?
And since it worked when EA put DRM in SPORE
Poll: Would you give SC2 a one star amazon rating to protest BNET?
Yes (6508)
83%
No (1331)
17%
7839 total votes
No (1331)
7839 total votes
Your vote: Would you give SC2 a one star amazon rating to protest BNET?
Featured Videos
Husky Video with over 300,000 views and counting...
Smix - Torn Battle.net 2.0 (Battle.net 2.0 sucks)
The Ghetto's "Battle.net 2.0: Where Everybody Knows Your Name"
Featured Threads
![[image loading]](http://sclegacy.com/features/sc2beta/b.netconcerns/header.jpg)
Introduction
Rarely, in a world constantly consumed by change, does something merely "good" manage to transcend the life expectancy of its parts and become something great. The existence of three perfectly balanced races, an accessible, yet difficult to master, gameplay experience, a strong hardcore community, a thriving e-sports presence, and a host of other factors have led to the creation of a legend among video games. StarCraft is considered by many to be the pinnacle of RTS gaming perfection. By other, less hardcore fans, who played it if even for a short while, it is remembered fondly; yet everyone agrees that its success and vitality was an unintended fluke. Somehow, over the course of a decade, an abundantly flawed game found the correct mix of elements (not all of which were Blizzard's creations) and evolved into a masterpiece. Now, twelve years after StarCraft's intial release, its sequel is about to be unleashed. There are immense expectations. Most popular games have a hardcore fan base, and StarCraft fans take this dedication to a whole new level. Even before the announcement of StarCraft II, StarCraft fans devoted huge portions of their lives to this game. Understandably, we have a stake in the depth, development, and quality of the sequel. However, StarCraft II will be released under a radically different set of circumstances than its predecessor.
Full Starcraft Legacy Article "Battle.net 2.0 Concerns"
http://sclegacy.com/articles/730-battlenet-20-concerns
83 page thread on the BNET forums about this topic: Closed by Blizzard
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25170606873&sid=5000
Starcraft Legacy thread showing 84% do not like the direction BNET 2.0 is taking
http://sclegacy.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4649&page=8
A Short History of Activision Blizzard Thread
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128252
Teamliquid Interview of Pros about Battlenet 2.0 "The Home Stretch"
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=129301
Starcraft LAN Petition with over 250,000 signed
http://www.petitiononline.com/LANSC2/petition.html
Cross Realm Conundrum Thread
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128027
Thread encouraging people to change their name to "ESPORTS" in protest of BNET 2.0
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128032
17 page BNET thread about Australians being locked to Asian Servers
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=24630603370&sid=5000
Battle.net 2.0: The Antithesis of Consumer Confidence
http://www.the-ghetto.org/content/battle-net-2-0-the-antithesis-of-consumer-confidence
Starcraft.org Thread "Frank Pearce sets the whole starcraft community ablaze"
http://forums.starcraft.org/showthread.php?t=45103
And the rest...
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/939643-starcraft-ii-wings-of-liberty/54992269
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/939643-starcraft-ii-wings-of-liberty/55077345
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/939643-starcraft-ii-wings-of-liberty/48150605
http://www.amazon.com/Why-Battlenet-2-0-SUCKS/forum/Fx2RW8IRFN8JW6J/TxMAX43B1KK17M/1?_encoding=UTF8&asin=B000ZKA0J6&cdSort=oldest&cdMessage=Mx13NOH3A4W8DI0
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=122403
http://www.dwainbunker.com/?p=103
http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3310790
http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3307477
http://www.gamerfill.com/node/221
http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/c9oe8/starcraft_commentator_husky_talks_about_battlenet/.mobile
http://sc2armory.com/forums/topic/15857/page:2
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.192919-Blizzards-Battle-net-2-0-Features-Facebook-Integration
http://forums.computerandvideogames.com/viewtopic.php?p=1697590&sid=e50a788104e234abc7901b2065d4465a
http://games.on.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=270&t=177227
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?s=920bf2192d5ac792f6373fd10c3cb9e8&t=395914
How to make yourself heard
+ Show Spoiler +
On May 29 2010 13:27 RyanS wrote:
Be Heard
Instead of just posting in a forum thread and being washed away, make sure Blizzard knows how you feel. Here are a variety of ways to get in touch and also get the word out. Make sure to be polite and express your thoughts. If this public outcry does not work, a boycott may have to be organized.
Remember the issues:
- Chat channels
- Cross region play
- No LAN, even after Battle.net validation
- League system
- Clan system
- Bnet 2.0 in general
Twitter:
http://twitter.com/StarCraft
http://twitter.com/Starcraft_PL
http://twitter.com/Starcraft_IT
http://twitter.com/Starcraft_RU
http://twitter.com/Starcraft_ES
http://twitter.com/Starcraft_FR
http://twitter.com/Starcraft_DE
Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/Blizzard
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraft
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraftZHTW (Chinese)
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraftRU
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraftPL
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraftIT
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraftFR
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraftES
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraftDE
YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/user/blizzard
Digg this:
http://digg.com/pc_games/Blizzard_Confirms_No_LAN_Play_Region_Lock_in_Starcraft_2
Blizzard Forums:
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25170606873&sid=5000&pageNo=1 (Topic on the interview with Frank Pearce)
http://forums.battle.net/board.html?forumId=25352526&sid=5000 (Beta NA Suggestions Forum)
Be Heard
Instead of just posting in a forum thread and being washed away, make sure Blizzard knows how you feel. Here are a variety of ways to get in touch and also get the word out. Make sure to be polite and express your thoughts. If this public outcry does not work, a boycott may have to be organized.
Remember the issues:
- Chat channels
- Cross region play
- No LAN, even after Battle.net validation
- League system
- Clan system
- Bnet 2.0 in general
Twitter:
http://twitter.com/StarCraft
http://twitter.com/Starcraft_PL
http://twitter.com/Starcraft_IT
http://twitter.com/Starcraft_RU
http://twitter.com/Starcraft_ES
http://twitter.com/Starcraft_FR
http://twitter.com/Starcraft_DE
Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/Blizzard
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraft
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraftZHTW (Chinese)
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraftRU
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraftPL
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraftIT
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraftFR
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraftES
http://www.facebook.com/StarCraftDE
YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/user/blizzard
Digg this:
http://digg.com/pc_games/Blizzard_Confirms_No_LAN_Play_Region_Lock_in_Starcraft_2
Blizzard Forums:
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25170606873&sid=5000&pageNo=1 (Topic on the interview with Frank Pearce)
http://forums.battle.net/board.html?forumId=25352526&sid=5000 (Beta NA Suggestions Forum)
Props to Hadraziel for bringing this to light
We are subject to risks associated with the collaborative online features in our games, such as World of Warcraft 's online chat feature, which allows consumers to post narrative comment, in real time, that is visible to other players. Despite our efforts to restrict inappropriate consumer content, from time to time objectionable and offensive consumer content may be posted to a World of Warcraft gaming site or the sites of other games or game services, such as Battle.net, with online chat features or game forums which allow consumers to post comments. We may be subject to lawsuits, governmental regulation or restrictions, and consumer backlash (including decreased sales and harmed reputation), as a result of consumers posting offensive content, any of which could harm our operating results.
http://investor.activision.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1047469-10-1649
http://investor.activision.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1047469-10-1649
Blizzard Official Responces
+ Show Spoiler +
Bashiok on the D3 Forums May 28th
Oh Clan-Iraq... you say things that are so Clan-Iraq.
This should probably be in the SC2 forums, but... eh... here ya go! Me shouting down your hyperbole once again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
1) No LAN Support
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
2) No chat rooms
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There will be chat rooms, they're just not making launch. Probably.
[ed] So Frank was out for interviews in EU it seems (?) and said something to the effect of "no chat rooms" but there would be chat for guilds and groups. Which is more or less what was said before. That it would be more about getting people into focused discussions instead of just having free for all chat systems. In any case, I don't know a lot about it. Personally, chat rooms are soooooo 2002.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
3) Paid DLC
It seems that maps and "expansion packs that are really part of the base game" are bumping the total price of SC2 to over $100 quite easily. I have no plans to buy the game, but I find that a little alarming. I hate to imagine how much D3 will cost in total- combined with the next factor:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alarming! How much was Lord of Destruction? Expansion packs are sold for skrilla.
If, however, you want to argue that StarCraft 2: Wings of Liberty is not a full sized and full-featured stand-alone release then... well you're not going to buy it anyway so ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
4) Pay-to-play
It has turned out that SC2 is indeed Pay-to-Play, despite all the promises we've had otherwise, in regions outside of the US. For example, Russian and South American players must subscribe to battle.net and get a set amount of "game hours" that expire and need to be renewed. Will such a system exist for D3?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We tailor our business models for each country/region based on many factors. Here in the US I can walk into a game store, buy a boxed product for about $60, take it home, and I generally expect that to include free multiplayer (unless I know it's a subscription MMO or whatever). That's not something you can do in all other countries, most don't have game stores, and so it's not something they generally work with. The exact same tailoring has been used for World of Warcraft.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
5) Region Locking
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's the last thing that was said on region locking (this was Sigaty btw):
Q: How far in the 'long term' are those plans which allow for swapping to U.S. servers on an E.U. account - or a global account?
A: Jumping to the region you want is definitely in the long term plan for Battle.net, although we do have some concerns about communicating properly to the player what's happening if they choose this because it WILL affect the latency of the game. As far as a date on when, I don't have one yet. There are a number of features that we want to make sure get out their first and jumping to different servers is lower on the priority list at the moment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
6) Statistical Balance Design
The developers for SC2 have been strictly using a statistical approach to balancing their game, ignoring player feedback and instead using only data harvested from the beta gameplay to balance their units.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hahaha. You're hilarious. We all play. All the designers and developers play. Some on semi-pro levels. We're in contact with many pro players, our friends and family that are playing, we read the forums, we read fansites, etc. etc. What I see as the main issue here is that a lot of the time people want balance changes based on flavor of the minute strategies without understanding that it's constantly evolving. So much so that from day to day the matchups could change dramatically.
Not seeing the balance changes you think should be made implemented is not the same as us ignoring the community and making arbitrary changes based on nothing but statistics. They're definitely a tool, but by no means are the sole or even biggest factor for balance changes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
7) Privacy Issues
Like Facebook and Google, Blizzard has been suffering its own acute privacy debacle- email addresses have been leaked
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well now you're just making stuff up.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
and SC2 requires questionable privacy details with an unsafe EULA- being able to share details like your Facebook account, and not allowing you to 'friend' users unless you're willing to show them your "Real Name" and Facebook, etc. I hate to imagine this spilling over to D3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everything stated here is vaguely incorrect to flat out wrong. You can add people to your friends list without being a RealID friend with them. The choice to ask for friend invites with Facebook friends is your choice. I don't even know what 'questionable privacy details with an unsafe EULA' is supposed to mean, but it SOUNDS like I should be pretty scared now.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
8) Complete Lack of Innovation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Seriously though, game play first. We're not going to try all sorts of crazy things just to try to be different. Our interest is in putting out a fun game, not one that exists to try out unproven mechanics, or push graphics/computing boundaries. This has been a fairly regular trait amongst Blizzard games.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
9) The switch to voice chat is horrendous. It leaves nothing to the imagination and makes you hate the people your playing with because of their ridiculous voices/accents (they all sound the same) and the breathing noises. Voice chat is horrible. I haven't played bnet voichat but every other voicechat i've ever played, counterstrike, xbx, ps3 is horrendous.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
??? You can chat in-game through text, same as always. If you want though:
Menu -> Options -> Voice -> Uncheck "Enable Voice Chat"
Then there's no chance you'll ever hear anyone. But it's a great tool for quick communication between teammates if you have a regular two's partner. Or whatever.
This should probably be in the SC2 forums, but... eh... here ya go! Me shouting down your hyperbole once again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
1) No LAN Support
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
2) No chat rooms
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There will be chat rooms, they're just not making launch. Probably.
[ed] So Frank was out for interviews in EU it seems (?) and said something to the effect of "no chat rooms" but there would be chat for guilds and groups. Which is more or less what was said before. That it would be more about getting people into focused discussions instead of just having free for all chat systems. In any case, I don't know a lot about it. Personally, chat rooms are soooooo 2002.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
3) Paid DLC
It seems that maps and "expansion packs that are really part of the base game" are bumping the total price of SC2 to over $100 quite easily. I have no plans to buy the game, but I find that a little alarming. I hate to imagine how much D3 will cost in total- combined with the next factor:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alarming! How much was Lord of Destruction? Expansion packs are sold for skrilla.
If, however, you want to argue that StarCraft 2: Wings of Liberty is not a full sized and full-featured stand-alone release then... well you're not going to buy it anyway so ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
4) Pay-to-play
It has turned out that SC2 is indeed Pay-to-Play, despite all the promises we've had otherwise, in regions outside of the US. For example, Russian and South American players must subscribe to battle.net and get a set amount of "game hours" that expire and need to be renewed. Will such a system exist for D3?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We tailor our business models for each country/region based on many factors. Here in the US I can walk into a game store, buy a boxed product for about $60, take it home, and I generally expect that to include free multiplayer (unless I know it's a subscription MMO or whatever). That's not something you can do in all other countries, most don't have game stores, and so it's not something they generally work with. The exact same tailoring has been used for World of Warcraft.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
5) Region Locking
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's the last thing that was said on region locking (this was Sigaty btw):
Q: How far in the 'long term' are those plans which allow for swapping to U.S. servers on an E.U. account - or a global account?
A: Jumping to the region you want is definitely in the long term plan for Battle.net, although we do have some concerns about communicating properly to the player what's happening if they choose this because it WILL affect the latency of the game. As far as a date on when, I don't have one yet. There are a number of features that we want to make sure get out their first and jumping to different servers is lower on the priority list at the moment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
6) Statistical Balance Design
The developers for SC2 have been strictly using a statistical approach to balancing their game, ignoring player feedback and instead using only data harvested from the beta gameplay to balance their units.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hahaha. You're hilarious. We all play. All the designers and developers play. Some on semi-pro levels. We're in contact with many pro players, our friends and family that are playing, we read the forums, we read fansites, etc. etc. What I see as the main issue here is that a lot of the time people want balance changes based on flavor of the minute strategies without understanding that it's constantly evolving. So much so that from day to day the matchups could change dramatically.
Not seeing the balance changes you think should be made implemented is not the same as us ignoring the community and making arbitrary changes based on nothing but statistics. They're definitely a tool, but by no means are the sole or even biggest factor for balance changes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
7) Privacy Issues
Like Facebook and Google, Blizzard has been suffering its own acute privacy debacle- email addresses have been leaked
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well now you're just making stuff up.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
and SC2 requires questionable privacy details with an unsafe EULA- being able to share details like your Facebook account, and not allowing you to 'friend' users unless you're willing to show them your "Real Name" and Facebook, etc. I hate to imagine this spilling over to D3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everything stated here is vaguely incorrect to flat out wrong. You can add people to your friends list without being a RealID friend with them. The choice to ask for friend invites with Facebook friends is your choice. I don't even know what 'questionable privacy details with an unsafe EULA' is supposed to mean, but it SOUNDS like I should be pretty scared now.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
8) Complete Lack of Innovation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Seriously though, game play first. We're not going to try all sorts of crazy things just to try to be different. Our interest is in putting out a fun game, not one that exists to try out unproven mechanics, or push graphics/computing boundaries. This has been a fairly regular trait amongst Blizzard games.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
9) The switch to voice chat is horrendous. It leaves nothing to the imagination and makes you hate the people your playing with because of their ridiculous voices/accents (they all sound the same) and the breathing noises. Voice chat is horrible. I haven't played bnet voichat but every other voicechat i've ever played, counterstrike, xbx, ps3 is horrendous.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
??? You can chat in-game through text, same as always. If you want though:
Menu -> Options -> Voice -> Uncheck "Enable Voice Chat"
Then there's no chance you'll ever hear anyone. But it's a great tool for quick communication between teammates if you have a regular two's partner. Or whatever.
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25171927052&pageNo=1&sid=3000#15
Worcaw responds on German forum (google translate) May 31st
To my knowledge, our thoughts are behind all that we do not want any unguided chat rooms, the sink quickly into chaos.
There should be chat features for focused discussions, but advanced functionality to it will most likely not until the start creating the game.
...
We currently can not go into more detail and give definitive answers to specific questions such as these.
Everything else would degenerate into more speculation on my side, what really helps you not continue.
I can assure you, however, that it is not our intention to take you to the fun on Battle.net by limiting social interaction. We want you can always be with the community and your friends in contact. This should, however, be regulated through lanes and putting all the players together in a chat room is not my opinion, this vision needs.
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25172118500&pageNo=1&sid=5011#8
Xordiah responds to "angry" posts May 5th
I have been watching these threads quite a bit over the week-end and I have to agree more with some of the replies than with the OP of this thread. Rage is not good. Rage makes the forums look like a spam-fest and rage makes us want to ignore players or even ban them, because their tone just gets out of hand. Rage makes players create 50 different threads on the same subject, whereas we prefer to have feedback bundled in one place.
What we do want to see and keep seeing from you is your feedback. We want to know if you do not agree with something, this never changes. What we do not want is players raging and just making unfounded accusations and crying doomsday because at the moment there is something missing that they feel is vital. Please do take a step back before raging - is this something that can be fixed? Do you still enjoy the game itself? Please give your feedback and give us the benefit of the doubt that we do want your game experience to be fun. Please always continue to give us your feedback, when you feel that there is something that you just can not live without. Please always continue to do so without rage and in a civil manner.
...
Not on topic though.
If there is a hot topic on something, we definitely want players to post and to discuss it. For sure, if there is a thread about a topic that reaches thousands of views and posts it catches our attention faster. This is in fact a signal, that a lot of players are concerned about this topic - it catches the attention and it is very likely to be passed on in our feedback reports.
What I wanted to bring up though was, that while having a lot of players have a very strong opinion about something is a good thing, it is a very bad thing if they are not able to communicate this in a constructive manner. Yes, post about things you don't like but help us change them and tell us why you don't like it or how you would like it. This does not mean that everything can be implemented exactly the way you wish for and it does not mean that we will definitely be able to implement it for launch or even shortly after launch - but a lot of players giving us their point of view on a subject gives us the possibility of bringing this up in an informed manner and also giving us the possibility of taking some good quotes out of these threads.
If we have 50 threads on the same topic, 80% of these are just one-liners saying that this is so terrible and we are a bad company (btw.. 77,2% of statistics are made up on the spot - thanks for the laugh Carighan), then it is hard to find the constructive ones that actually give us the information that we need and just makes us waste a lot of our time for moderation of forums that we could have used a lot better in compiling the feedback.
Just one thing I want to keep pointing out, it has been said before and I always keep saying it - we are on your side.
We want to make a game we enjoy and you enjoy. There are timelines that need to be kept, there might be priorities that you don't understand, but in the end, if there is something that is important to you be sure that we will be passing it on. If you rage - you will lose your voice on these forums and you will be one less person fighting for what you want, if you post in a mannered way, we get a lot more out of you as a beta tester. /end wall of text!
....
Remember, Battle.net 2.0 is work in progress. What a lot of players don't read in the rage is the part where Frank Pearce is talking about Clan chat and Groups chat. That is definitely being worked on. If you check back to our last Twitter dev chat, there was the same question (http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=23767157319&sid=3000):
"We do have plans for chat channels. Specifically, we want to organize chat channels around users' interests so you know what types of conversations you are going to get into when you join a channel. This feature is not something that will be in for beta. Currently we plan to do this feature in a patch after the game launches. "
...
Hehe.. we do ask for your opinion. That is what this forum is for, that is what the beta test if for and we have pulled quite a few things out of these forums. Sometimes getting involved in discussions does change the course of the discussion though. Just now we just wanted to jump in, because it just turned too emotional and this usually leads to a lot of flaming and insulting which is something we don't want to see on the forums.
...
You mean the thread where you were just talking about how you won't use it but it doesn't hurt you either and you're just mad because of the priorities? That feedback was passed on, but just please note that the Facebook integration in its current form, is a lot simpler to implement than most of you would believe.
....
By the way, something that might have come off wrong when explaining this. We don't want/need a wall of text from every single player. If you just want to show your support, than posting just a small confirmation that this is what you feel as well is totally valid. But please make sure that this is not posted in an insulting manner.
...
To be honest, the kittens distracted me tons while watching that video. ^^
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25170778216&pageNo=1&sid=5010#4
Kapeselus responds to a Cross-realm thread June 1st
You copied the first sentence, while the rest of the paragraph answers your question for the most part. StarCraft was made in the 28k-56k modem era and because the game is not that demanding, today (many years later) it is possible to play against American and (some) Korean players (still not Chinese for example, because of latency). Even in Warcraft III if you wanted to play against someone from the USA being in Europe it would mean ~250ms and possibly some spikes. In case of players from Asia or Australia for that matter it would be much higher and rarely stable. How many times have you played on the Lordaeron (US) or Kalimdor (Asia) gateway in e.g. WC3 or any newer games than BW for that matter? What was the percentage of players you could play against without lag issues? Would you like to jump from game to game constantly and leave, discouraged by huge latency? Also think about your opponents - wouldn't it affect them as well? I personally just cannot see players not getting frustrated by lags given how many discussions we have had that 125ms in-built latency is way too high. I don't even mention the matchmaking, because it would be unplayable and with proper filters it would match you against European players only anyway.
Please reconsider and don't rage without thinking it over. I am sure it will be possible in the future, but for now “the technology's just not there yet”.
Please reconsider and don't rage without thinking it over. I am sure it will be possible in the future, but for now “the technology's just not there yet”.
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25172119183&pageNo=1&sid=5010#18
Kapeselus on Crossrealms June 3rd
When you read the Frank Pearce interview you will notice that he didn't answer the cross-realm question the way you try to picture it. He was asked directly about a possibility of playing in different regions. We don't encourage it, it is not meant to be a "money grab" and it is only a possible workaround, as while we don't want you to do it, we also are not going to prevent it from happening. It's not like Frank Pearce said "yes, we give you this amazing opportunity and we have a special promotion for you: when you buy copies for all 3 regions, you will get a 2% discount". In our opinion it is not a good way of experiencing the game, but we are going to pass on your feedback.
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25172119183&sid=5010&pageNo=7
Baskiok says Blizzard is working on a "comprehensive address" June 4th
Thanks for the collection of feedback and the constructive tone. Always appreciated.
We're fully aware of the concerns that are being discussed in the various threads, on fansites, detailed through kitten videos, etc. and we're in the midst of working on a comprehensive address that should hit most of the major concerns. Just a heads up.
We're fully aware of the concerns that are being discussed in the various threads, on fansites, detailed through kitten videos, etc. and we're in the midst of working on a comprehensive address that should hit most of the major concerns. Just a heads up.
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25170840862&sid=5000&pageNo=3#59
Zhydaris comments on Blizzards Commitment to Quality and BNET June 9th
The game still needs to be balanced in some areas (and when these get balanced, new issues will arise of course, so it'll be a looooong way before it's perfect)
Absolutely. The game isn't perfect, Battle.Net isn't perfect. But you know what? We'll try to get there.
And yes, we definitely need you all to get there, with all the feedback you can provide. We'll do our best because we don't want to let you down.
This is an amazing company and it keeps surprising me. Several months ago I tried an unfinished version of one of the localized clients. It was good, indeed. But that was it. Just good.
I recently tried a more polished version of the same client and all I could think was "... Wow, this is amazing". Just when I thought that the localized version was good, I was blown away by the attention to details that was put in that version. And I'm confident that the same thing will happen again and again, at release, at every content patch, and so on.
Just bear with us, because we definitely didn't forget our "Commit to quality" core value.
-Zhydaris
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25170613975&pageNo=1&sid=5010#2
Bashiok on ETA for "comprehensive address" June 10th
SC2GDF I think, just so we don't fragment discussion across multiple forums in case the reset happens soon after. Also while we obviously wanted to let everyone know before hand we were aware and working on something to address the major concerns, plans have kind of changed. We came to the conclusion that just throwing out a huge post that goes over everything would really dilute the conversation and make it difficult to hold a dialogue on any one concern. Everyone would just be replying to whatever issue they felt was most important, or detailing out a response to every thing in one reply. (And then good luck to me to try to reply to any of it.) So we'll be taking a more natural forum response approach to keep all the various concerns focused so we can discuss each more easily. Anyway. Soon. ish. Hopefully.
-Bashiok
-Bashiok
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25170615347&sid=5000&pageNo=2
Bashiok further discusses chat channels June 15th
Do the community managers actually manage the community and tell the big man upstairs that the community is pissed or do they just maximize a browser with the forums on it every thirty minutes and delete/ban half the forum? More importantly, do they notice the same people they have banned so many times its not even funny anymore, keep coming back?
Did Karune get hit by a bus? Has Xorbediah been destroyed by Kotick Private Security? Was Cavez put in a closet and told he can't come out until starcraft 2 ships?
We're painfully aware.
I won't make any excuses as to why forum communication took a dive, but it seems that we're starting to get our heads above water again and hopefully we can get our activity in all of our forums back up (SC2 isn't the only place that has suffered). I don't know. Maybe that's being too optimistic.
Personally I've really been waiting to get our information and responses solidified for the big key issues. There's almost no point in posting unless we can hit the main concerns. It's in the works. Soon. And all that.
cheeto lightsaber
Tell me more.
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html...34229&sid=3000
This is a valid question, I've seen this pop up on TL and other sites. Not answering equals admitting Activision is making all the decisions for you.
Haha, is that what it means? Logical.
Yeah, that's on our list of things we need to provide more info on.
HAI BASHIOK~
BUT YOU SAID!
You know, instead of making a list of when and how to "deal with an information problem", you could answer the damn question.
Think globally!
Heh. Well, we have to make sure what we're saying is what we want to say, there's enough misinformation out there that guessing what the answer is probably isn't a good idea. Also, we do have to create documents and make sure they're approved by the designers/producers in charge, and then sent out for localization or at least so we're prepared with the proper info in all languages.
Gone are the days of posting ad-hoc. They will be missed.
"Can I say this?" "No"
"But this?" "No"
"What about this?" "No.."
"But.." "Just shut yer mouth and wait for your orders!"
What? I've been at Blizzard 6.5 years. I've been a community manager... 4, or so? Things work now like they've worked since World of Warcraft got big and we became a large global company. We have to coordinate communication. It's how it's worked for many years.
Bashiok why was the main reason for no chat due to spam?
Wouldn't the whole "One account one cd key" eliminate the possibility of people spamming? simply permaban and force them to buy a new one if they want to spam.
Who is banning them, and what is generating their pay to patrol/moderate millions of users?
You could make it automated, I recall wc3 cd keys getting muted for countlessly flooding channels.
That's one specific type of channel abuse that could maybe be automated for a second until someone figures out the requirements to avoid it, and then continues to do it anyway.
The idea that viewing occasional spam is so horrifying that all forms of chat channels (including private channels which were the ones players actually used and were never spammed) needed to be removed insults my intelligence and service to this country.
We'll have private chat channels, they just aren't making it in for the release date.
In fact, the only thing I can think of that is more offensive is the idea that Blizzard cannot afford to pay someone $10 an hour to moderate the 10-15 public chat channels that Battle.net 2.0 would theoretically have.
So 10-15 channels would serve the millions that will inevitably purchase the game? Those are some busy channels. And one person would be able to moderate all those people by their lonesome?
I've worked in consumer product development, and it's been obvious from the beginning that the reason for not implementing chat channels is avoiding the (substantial) support cost associated with enforcing guidelines on their use.
Yes, WC3 and SC1 had chat channels, and yes, both were very popular games. However, World of Warcraft has both grown Blizzard's audience substantially, and has also set a particular standard of support that's been based on having a continuous revenue stream from the game.
It's quite likely that the choice with respect to chat channels came out of a realization that providing the level of support people expect today to deal with rule-breakers would require Blizzard to charge a monthly fee, and that the way it fell out was that not having chat channels was seen as preferable to charging a monthly fee to play the game, particularly since Blizzard's competitors in the RTS market do not charge such fees. Also, it's quite possible that Blizzard's leadership are unhappy, in retrospect, with the level of support they were able to provide WC3 and earlier games, given their WoW experience.
Now, in the long run it may be that Blizzard encounters such pushback on the chat channel issue that they basically have to eat the cost of that support. If this happens, I'm not entirely sure that the long-term result is what the community would want. That long-term result might be that the NEXT game simply includes a fee to play to ensure that the game remains profitable to support.
Blizzard is a very successful company, but they're already plowing the bulk of their profits back into new development and rapid growth. Their resources are not unlimited, and saying "Try to tell us you can't afford this!" doesn't make them so.
Enlightened, thanks!
Bashiok, Teamliquid moderates thousands of posters....for free.
Really? really.
These are the quotes that make me want to go lay down.
Teamliquid can get away with it because they're supporting the community with no profit incentive, so people volunteer to help out. If Blizzard tried that, here's how the conversation would go:
Them: "Hey, would you like to be a chat moderator, responsible for strictly adhering to our set of requirements for banning people from chat channels, with no flexibility to make your own decisions about what's acceptable?"
Me: "How much does it pay?"
Them: "How about $0/hr, with time and a half for overtime?"
Me: "No."
This.
Benzenn requests traceroute information from Oceanic players June 16th
Did Karune get hit by a bus? Has Xorbediah been destroyed by Kotick Private Security? Was Cavez put in a closet and told he can't come out until starcraft 2 ships?
We're painfully aware.
I won't make any excuses as to why forum communication took a dive, but it seems that we're starting to get our heads above water again and hopefully we can get our activity in all of our forums back up (SC2 isn't the only place that has suffered). I don't know. Maybe that's being too optimistic.
Personally I've really been waiting to get our information and responses solidified for the big key issues. There's almost no point in posting unless we can hit the main concerns. It's in the works. Soon. And all that.
cheeto lightsaber
Tell me more.
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html...34229&sid=3000
This is a valid question, I've seen this pop up on TL and other sites. Not answering equals admitting Activision is making all the decisions for you.
Haha, is that what it means? Logical.
Yeah, that's on our list of things we need to provide more info on.
HAI BASHIOK~
BUT YOU SAID!
You know, instead of making a list of when and how to "deal with an information problem", you could answer the damn question.
Think globally!
Heh. Well, we have to make sure what we're saying is what we want to say, there's enough misinformation out there that guessing what the answer is probably isn't a good idea. Also, we do have to create documents and make sure they're approved by the designers/producers in charge, and then sent out for localization or at least so we're prepared with the proper info in all languages.
Gone are the days of posting ad-hoc. They will be missed.
"Can I say this?" "No"
"But this?" "No"
"What about this?" "No.."
"But.." "Just shut yer mouth and wait for your orders!"
What? I've been at Blizzard 6.5 years. I've been a community manager... 4, or so? Things work now like they've worked since World of Warcraft got big and we became a large global company. We have to coordinate communication. It's how it's worked for many years.
Bashiok why was the main reason for no chat due to spam?
Wouldn't the whole "One account one cd key" eliminate the possibility of people spamming? simply permaban and force them to buy a new one if they want to spam.
Who is banning them, and what is generating their pay to patrol/moderate millions of users?
You could make it automated, I recall wc3 cd keys getting muted for countlessly flooding channels.
That's one specific type of channel abuse that could maybe be automated for a second until someone figures out the requirements to avoid it, and then continues to do it anyway.
The idea that viewing occasional spam is so horrifying that all forms of chat channels (including private channels which were the ones players actually used and were never spammed) needed to be removed insults my intelligence and service to this country.
We'll have private chat channels, they just aren't making it in for the release date.
In fact, the only thing I can think of that is more offensive is the idea that Blizzard cannot afford to pay someone $10 an hour to moderate the 10-15 public chat channels that Battle.net 2.0 would theoretically have.
So 10-15 channels would serve the millions that will inevitably purchase the game? Those are some busy channels. And one person would be able to moderate all those people by their lonesome?
I've worked in consumer product development, and it's been obvious from the beginning that the reason for not implementing chat channels is avoiding the (substantial) support cost associated with enforcing guidelines on their use.
Yes, WC3 and SC1 had chat channels, and yes, both were very popular games. However, World of Warcraft has both grown Blizzard's audience substantially, and has also set a particular standard of support that's been based on having a continuous revenue stream from the game.
It's quite likely that the choice with respect to chat channels came out of a realization that providing the level of support people expect today to deal with rule-breakers would require Blizzard to charge a monthly fee, and that the way it fell out was that not having chat channels was seen as preferable to charging a monthly fee to play the game, particularly since Blizzard's competitors in the RTS market do not charge such fees. Also, it's quite possible that Blizzard's leadership are unhappy, in retrospect, with the level of support they were able to provide WC3 and earlier games, given their WoW experience.
Now, in the long run it may be that Blizzard encounters such pushback on the chat channel issue that they basically have to eat the cost of that support. If this happens, I'm not entirely sure that the long-term result is what the community would want. That long-term result might be that the NEXT game simply includes a fee to play to ensure that the game remains profitable to support.
Blizzard is a very successful company, but they're already plowing the bulk of their profits back into new development and rapid growth. Their resources are not unlimited, and saying "Try to tell us you can't afford this!" doesn't make them so.
Enlightened, thanks!
Bashiok, Teamliquid moderates thousands of posters....for free.
Really? really.
These are the quotes that make me want to go lay down.
Teamliquid can get away with it because they're supporting the community with no profit incentive, so people volunteer to help out. If Blizzard tried that, here's how the conversation would go:
Them: "Hey, would you like to be a chat moderator, responsible for strictly adhering to our set of requirements for banning people from chat channels, with no flexibility to make your own decisions about what's acceptable?"
Me: "How much does it pay?"
Them: "How about $0/hr, with time and a half for overtime?"
Me: "No."
This.
Benzenn requests traceroute information from Oceanic players June 16th
You can provide us with traceroute information here: http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25399742814&sid=3000
------
To help people trace to the correct location of the new Southeast Asia servers we have an IP and instructions that can be used to test your latency. We're hoping we can then use that to gauge the connection speeds more appropriately.
Please be aware that there will be timeouts for the last few hops, and that's normal. At that point you've already hit our datacenter, but the server information will stop being returned after a certain point for security reasons.
If you're utilizing tunneling we strongly recommend you disable it before tracing as the results may not represent the data path accurately.
Southeast Asia Battle.net Test IP address: 202.9.67.100
You can find instructions for performing a traceroute at: http://us.blizzard.com/support/article.xml?locale=en_US&articleId=21140
------
To help people trace to the correct location of the new Southeast Asia servers we have an IP and instructions that can be used to test your latency. We're hoping we can then use that to gauge the connection speeds more appropriately.
Please be aware that there will be timeouts for the last few hops, and that's normal. At that point you've already hit our datacenter, but the server information will stop being returned after a certain point for security reasons.
If you're utilizing tunneling we strongly recommend you disable it before tracing as the results may not represent the data path accurately.
Southeast Asia Battle.net Test IP address: 202.9.67.100
You can find instructions for performing a traceroute at: http://us.blizzard.com/support/article.xml?locale=en_US&articleId=21140
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=24630603370&sid=5000&pageNo=20
Because posting is no longer possible in the StarCraft II beta forums (http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25170615347&sid=5000), we’ve created this thread for players in the Oceanic region to provide us with their traceroute information so that we can gauge your connection. This information is very important to us as it helps us provide you with better performance. Please read through this information carefully and reply here with your traceroute info.
------
To help people trace to the correct location of the new Southeast Asia servers we have an IP and instructions that can be used to test your latency. We're hoping we can then use that to gauge the connection speeds more appropriately.
Please be aware that there will be timeouts for the last few hops, and that's normal. At that point you've already hit our datacenter, but the server information will stop being returned after a certain point for security reasons.
If you're utilizing tunneling we strongly recommend you disable it before tracing as the results may not represent the data path accurately.
Southeast Asia Battle.net Test IP address: 202.9.67.100
You can find instructions for performing a traceroute at: http://us.blizzard.com/support/article.xml?locale=en_US&articleId=21140
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25399742814&sid=3000
Bashiok says that cross realm play will be avalible "within the first few months of Starcraft II's release" June 16th
Getting people online, playing and interacting is obviously the overall goal for the Battle.net platform, and that includes allowing people to play across regional boundaries as they have in the past.
Unfortunately, there are a multitude of challenges we have to overcome due to the unique regional account and billing options that didn't exist in the past. But those hurdles aren't insurmountable, and we are looking into solutions that will allow interested players to obtain access to other regional versions without having to buy another full copy of the game. Those solutions are something we're currently planning to have available through Battle.net Account Management within the first few months of StarCraft II's release.
Before that solution is implemented though, you're correct in that you'd need to purchase a US copy of the game on launch day to play in the US region.
Unfortunately, there are a multitude of challenges we have to overcome due to the unique regional account and billing options that didn't exist in the past. But those hurdles aren't insurmountable, and we are looking into solutions that will allow interested players to obtain access to other regional versions without having to buy another full copy of the game. Those solutions are something we're currently planning to have available through Battle.net Account Management within the first few months of StarCraft II's release.
Before that solution is implemented though, you're correct in that you'd need to purchase a US copy of the game on launch day to play in the US region.
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25171934229&postId=253974380205&sid=3000#54
Kapeselus and Zhydaris respond to Core Issues June 17th
Player-based "core" issues, in no certain order:
1. Are chat channels predicted to be coming sooner than later?
1.5. Will we have private channels much like the B.net 1 structure, even without the presence of public default channels?
2. Is LAN play restricted solely to tournaments, given the information provided about "Premium" edition?
2.5. Will LAN see a future in retail versions of SC2?
3a. Will identifiers return?
3a.5. Will there be a search structure to find friends if they do?
3b. Will the final naming system allow for non-unique names?
3b.5. If names are unique, will we be allowed more characters/numerals/symbols?
I'll pause with that.
There will definitely be "chat channels" coming in one of the patches after the release. The system will be based around groups, where you will be able to join public channels that are based around your interests, which can be virtually anything. Also the system will include private chat channels (in plans for release in the first few months after the release), where you will be able to meet with your friends.
As for identifiers they are returning for the second phase of the beta. The previous system did not work as intended to some degree and based on feedback received the developers decided to implement a variation of this, which is going to attach character codes. These will be three digit numbers added to your nickname and they will be seen in the UI screens. Thanks to this you will be able to add friends manually, just like previously with identifiers. On top of that you can still add friends using all other methods (using the score screen or RealID).
I'll pause with that.
-Kapeselus
Thanks for putting out some of the flames, to bad 90% of the posters who want to "know" will miss this post.
We'll just post the answer again and again, we're kinda used to it
-Zhydaris
Ahem, I think they where asking Bashiok... /sarcasm
Oh... You didn't know we were all Bashiok? Or rather Bashiok is all of us? Erm... I mean Bashiok is one person posting with all those accounts? Maybe all those accounts are one Bashiok? Which would imply that one account or all accounts posess all the Bashioks.
Just noticed the post in the other thread. I hope I/he/we/they won't mind.
-Kapeselus
The post is much appreciated. Can you provide an additional piece of info on the 3-digit identifiers: is the identifier number selected by the player, or automatically assigned? i.e. I'm the first to create the name CheezDip so I am CheezDip.001?
The number will be automatically generated. Please keep in mind that you won't be able to see this code everywhere, but only on certain screens. (i.e. it won't get in the way and it won't ruin the "look" of your nickname, don't worry! )
-Zhydaris
What is the point with identifiers? Just let us use numbers and symbols like in war3 and sc1 so we can have unique names. Do you really want people to be called ESPORTS001 ESPORTS002 ESPORTS003 ESPORTS004 ESPORTS005 and so on? Noone wants the identifiers! Please listen to the community.
Why should you pick "esports" as a nickname exactly? Just pick the nickname that you prefer.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128032
This is why.
Just so you know why you have 999 players named "Esports" at the next beta reset.
Well, I'll be honest: I can't actually see the usefulness of such initiative and I don't see how it even fits this discussion.
These people are naming themselves "ESPORTS" to protest against:
- Lack of Chat Channels
... and we just announced that Chat Channels are going to be in the game a few months after release.
- No Cross-region play
... and we just announced that cross-region play is definitely in our plans.
- No Unique ID
... And we just announced that every combination of nickname + 3 digit code will be unique and you will be able to add friends by using this combination.
- You need to give out your email address
... Which is not the case anymore, as adding Nickname.007 will be enough.
I can understand the reasons behind such initiative, but I don't think that they chose the best method to explain their concerns, they will just end up sharing the same nickname with a different 3 digit code.
I don't see how this will contribute to voice their concerns, let alone solve them.
We listen to the community, we don't listen to... flocks of nicknames. We need useful feedback, opinions, suggestions, concerns, questions and so on, ending up with hundreds of people sharing part of their identifier (aka only the nickname part) is not going to help at all. You all are more than welcome to post in these forums and share your concerns, I believe that we just addressed the main concerns that were brought up on these boards and we would like your feedback based on what we disclosed today.
This is the only way we're going to make Battle.net 2.0 better.
-Zhydaris
all of this sounds very excellent Mr. Blue, but what about custom game interface?
there is definitely a problem with the "popularity" system as well as having unique names for custom games and even the lobbies themselves are lacking substance...
Any clarification on this issue Mr. Blue?
We don't have any update to share regarding this topic at the moment.
As we move closer to Phase Two / Release we will have more information about this.
-Zhydaris
Well then Mr. Blue can you at least say something is going to change or still going to stay the same : )
surely you can respond to this question : ) sorry for being nosy, i'm just curious : )
As I just said, there's nothing we can share about this at the moment.
-Zhydaris
1. Are chat channels predicted to be coming sooner than later?
1.5. Will we have private channels much like the B.net 1 structure, even without the presence of public default channels?
2. Is LAN play restricted solely to tournaments, given the information provided about "Premium" edition?
2.5. Will LAN see a future in retail versions of SC2?
3a. Will identifiers return?
3a.5. Will there be a search structure to find friends if they do?
3b. Will the final naming system allow for non-unique names?
3b.5. If names are unique, will we be allowed more characters/numerals/symbols?
I'll pause with that.
There will definitely be "chat channels" coming in one of the patches after the release. The system will be based around groups, where you will be able to join public channels that are based around your interests, which can be virtually anything. Also the system will include private chat channels (in plans for release in the first few months after the release), where you will be able to meet with your friends.
As for identifiers they are returning for the second phase of the beta. The previous system did not work as intended to some degree and based on feedback received the developers decided to implement a variation of this, which is going to attach character codes. These will be three digit numbers added to your nickname and they will be seen in the UI screens. Thanks to this you will be able to add friends manually, just like previously with identifiers. On top of that you can still add friends using all other methods (using the score screen or RealID).
I'll pause with that.
-Kapeselus
Thanks for putting out some of the flames, to bad 90% of the posters who want to "know" will miss this post.
We'll just post the answer again and again, we're kinda used to it
-Zhydaris
Ahem, I think they where asking Bashiok... /sarcasm
Oh... You didn't know we were all Bashiok? Or rather Bashiok is all of us? Erm... I mean Bashiok is one person posting with all those accounts? Maybe all those accounts are one Bashiok? Which would imply that one account or all accounts posess all the Bashioks.
Just noticed the post in the other thread. I hope I/he/we/they won't mind.
-Kapeselus
The post is much appreciated. Can you provide an additional piece of info on the 3-digit identifiers: is the identifier number selected by the player, or automatically assigned? i.e. I'm the first to create the name CheezDip so I am CheezDip.001?
The number will be automatically generated. Please keep in mind that you won't be able to see this code everywhere, but only on certain screens. (i.e. it won't get in the way and it won't ruin the "look" of your nickname, don't worry! )
-Zhydaris
What is the point with identifiers? Just let us use numbers and symbols like in war3 and sc1 so we can have unique names. Do you really want people to be called ESPORTS001 ESPORTS002 ESPORTS003 ESPORTS004 ESPORTS005 and so on? Noone wants the identifiers! Please listen to the community.
Why should you pick "esports" as a nickname exactly? Just pick the nickname that you prefer.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128032
This is why.
Just so you know why you have 999 players named "Esports" at the next beta reset.
Well, I'll be honest: I can't actually see the usefulness of such initiative and I don't see how it even fits this discussion.
These people are naming themselves "ESPORTS" to protest against:
- Lack of Chat Channels
... and we just announced that Chat Channels are going to be in the game a few months after release.
- No Cross-region play
... and we just announced that cross-region play is definitely in our plans.
- No Unique ID
... And we just announced that every combination of nickname + 3 digit code will be unique and you will be able to add friends by using this combination.
- You need to give out your email address
... Which is not the case anymore, as adding Nickname.007 will be enough.
I can understand the reasons behind such initiative, but I don't think that they chose the best method to explain their concerns, they will just end up sharing the same nickname with a different 3 digit code.
I don't see how this will contribute to voice their concerns, let alone solve them.
We listen to the community, we don't listen to... flocks of nicknames. We need useful feedback, opinions, suggestions, concerns, questions and so on, ending up with hundreds of people sharing part of their identifier (aka only the nickname part) is not going to help at all. You all are more than welcome to post in these forums and share your concerns, I believe that we just addressed the main concerns that were brought up on these boards and we would like your feedback based on what we disclosed today.
This is the only way we're going to make Battle.net 2.0 better.
-Zhydaris
all of this sounds very excellent Mr. Blue, but what about custom game interface?
there is definitely a problem with the "popularity" system as well as having unique names for custom games and even the lobbies themselves are lacking substance...
Any clarification on this issue Mr. Blue?
We don't have any update to share regarding this topic at the moment.
As we move closer to Phase Two / Release we will have more information about this.
-Zhydaris
Well then Mr. Blue can you at least say something is going to change or still going to stay the same : )
surely you can respond to this question : ) sorry for being nosy, i'm just curious : )
As I just said, there's nothing we can share about this at the moment.
-Zhydaris
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25399622869&sid=3000&pageNo=1
