|
On June 04 2010 04:11 revy wrote:
My god people are sure angry. Yeah b.net 2.0 isn't perfect but I do see a lot of good stuff in there. Functionality will be added eventually, you know Blizzard wont just ignore this stuff once they hear it. I don't think people understand how difficult it can be to get these things to work.
TBH the only thing I am really upset about is the buy another copy if you want to play on a different server, that's just greedy and stupid.
As for the game itself, it is a darn good successor to the original.
People are angry because most of the features which we all want will not ever be in the game, or at the very least not any time soon. If Blizzard had said "we're working on x, y, and z and they will all be in when they are ready", people might grumble a bit but they would ultimately be ok with it.
Instead we get arrogant statements from Blizzard reps like "who wants chatrooms? lol". And statements saying that those who wish to play across regions will need to purchase additional copies of the game.
|
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?
Just a thought, but I think that what he really means is that you'll have secondary friend lists for "groups" and "clans", and we'll be stuck with the same interface that we have for friends. I really doubt they'd code the friend interface with the group and clan features in mind without making it at least a little modular...
Edit: After all, when people say "chat room", I think many people think of AIM-style chat rooms, not IRC-style chat channels.
Edit 2: With all the talk of Amazon ratings, don't forget about Metascores on Metacritic: http://www.metacritic.com/
There is a user Metascore for each game there too.
|
Walt Disney used to have a saying to his fellow employees, it was something like this; "We're only as good as our last movie."
Listen up Blizzard, the people are watching...
|
I recently posted about my own responce to the whole Battle.net 2.0 situation, but unfortunately it may have been to exterme for some people hehe. (Thus it was Closedier)
Anywho I have a theory about why there's no chat channels, I mean why shouldn't there be chat channels, and it came back to the whole XBox 360 feel of 2.0, and the fact that Blizzard has stated that all games will be linked to this new interface, I mean even XBOX Live now has Facebook as one of it's online features.
It has to have something to do with the new MMORPG they are working on, they're thinking long term, what it this thing is some sort of MMOFPS that alot of people seem to be guessing at, what if it will be a console MMOFPS, what if XBOX Live and Blizzard where to merge Interfaces?
I mean Chat channels wouldn't work well then?
I called it first!!
|
From the EU forums
Xordiah : I heard the players want chat channels. ^^
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25170440254&sid=5010&pageNo=1
Kapeselus :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
|
On June 03 2010 21:10 shlomo wrote:
If the real concern with xrealm was latency, Blizzard would keep the gateway selection in and just add a warning message when connecting to a non-default region.
Something to the effect of "be warned that you might experience higher latency playing on a non-recommended server, do you really want to blah blah blah". The few gamers who haven't made friends in different countries while on the internet (you know this big network where you can connect to the entire world - it's a whole new concept in 2010!) and don't care for xrealm would be deterred enough, everyone else would be happy, and this would be it.
Instead they're saying the problem is latency so you can't connect to another server, while offering to let you play anyway IF you agree to shell out another $60. Lol. Yeah, ok.
Its funny because they actually have something like that in Brood War LOL. Blizzard is failing pretty hard.
|
I don't believe the whole "we are making sc2 bad cause we want wow subscribers" cause chances are if your hooked into wow your not going to be into sc2 all that much, yeah you might buy it but you'll continue to raid/pvp in wow. I have no more interest in wow and not looking foward to go back, so I'm looking at it like blizzard is pulling me in with another game so they better make this one good.
|
Being the gigantic optimist I am, Blizzard have so far stated they are looking into:
Ladder showing no real info for top players
Chat Channels
Region lock
(Fully expecting good results on all of these)
Also expecting this LAN thing to be super low latency "ping the Bnet server and get back to it"
So the problem remaining is what happens at LAN parties when Bnet is down.
Beyond that things are looking up? :>
*hides*
|
posted in the thread where xoridah said something about players wanting chat channels.
Xordiah :Sorry, I shouldn't have derailed the thread. Just couldn't resist when tempted. 
Back on topic guys! Ignore my comment. :D
i think this means to nullify his earlier comment.
might be though, that they are actually working on chat channels.
|
He He You cant talk or play with your friends in our new improved BNET 2.0 : D
And we didnt mean for you to have to buy the game 3 times to get full functionality. Its just a happy lil side effect He He : D :D :D
Anywho we hear you but arnt going to do anything about it cause its super dupeeer low priority and sooooooooooooooo 2002 ^^
|
I believe that most things are/will be fine and that they are listening. People whine too much and don't even think about the problems. Just jump ahead and rage. Things will come with time.
Only huge issue I still see is LAN - it is something that they can't/won't change easily. There has to be some work around for it in order to have functional tournaments. I can't imagine a tournament waiting for BNET to go up lol. Plus this will further push players and leagues to be played online.
The money issues won't change, sorry Europe/Asia. Someone has to be paying for servers in the long term, plus extra moneyz = more features in future.
|
No problem, Blizzard. 
I'll buy Starcraft 2 when its Battle.net will be finished, or when the game will be sell in premium.
Don't wanna play a game where I can't play in funny events, like the 2v2v2v2 BGH with Day[9].
2v2v2v2v2v2v2v2 in SC2 ?
The only other way is to convince all my friends to play on US server.
|
On June 04 2010 07:52 uniquee wrote:
I believe that most things are/will be fine and that they are listening. People whine too much and don't even think about the problems. Just jump ahead and rage. Things will come with time.
Only huge issue I still see is LAN - it is something that they can't/won't change easily. There has to be some work around for it in order to have functional tournaments. I can't imagine a tournament waiting for BNET to go up lol. Plus this will further push players and leagues to be played online.
The money issues won't change, sorry Europe/Asia. Someone has to be paying for servers in the long term, plus extra moneyz = more features in future.
I hate pst like these so much.
it'll come with time you say? You know what I expect to come with time? Game balance..but basic functionality with chat rooms shouldn't take TIME. They delayed beta for a whole year! They said bnet 2.0 would be amazing. What do we get with a year of extra time? Something with less functionality than the first bnet. Yes people are pissed and they have the right to be. Just sitting there doing nothing brings nothing either.
right now bnet 2.0 is barely better than iwnet...and that is a horrible sign
|
On June 04 2010 08:08 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2010 07:52 uniquee wrote:
I believe that most things are/will be fine and that they are listening. People whine too much and don't even think about the problems. Just jump ahead and rage. Things will come with time.
Only huge issue I still see is LAN - it is something that they can't/won't change easily. There has to be some work around for it in order to have functional tournaments. I can't imagine a tournament waiting for BNET to go up lol. Plus this will further push players and leagues to be played online.
The money issues won't change, sorry Europe/Asia. Someone has to be paying for servers in the long term, plus extra moneyz = more features in future. I hate pst like these so much. it'll come with time you say? You know what I expect to come with time? Game balance..but basic functionality with chat rooms shouldn't take TIME. They delayed beta for a whole year! They said bnet 2.0 would be amazing. What do we get with a year of extra time? Something with less functionality than the first bnet. Yes people are pissed and they have the right to be. Just sitting there doing nothing brings nothing either. right now bnet 2.0 is barely better than iwnet...and that is a horrible sign
Some people always say that. Hell, I remember back in the Hellgate: London alpha (and later in the beta) everyone going "it'lll be ok, they are listening to us, everything will be fixed by launch time". Since its out of our hands anyway now, all we can do is watch.
|
If the game had server based network architecture instead of peer to peer, then connecting players between regions wouldn't be a problem.
As it stands, I think Blizzard is concerned that too many region hopping players will be detrimental to the native players from a region, because both players will experience lag to the same extent, as per peer to peer.
This wouldn't be an issue with a server based network architecture, like the one in HoN for example, where only the player with the high latency to the servers would experience the lag he is causing.
In light of the game's inferior peer to peer networking I can actually understand Blizzard's position on this matter; even though the additional lag from network hoppers might not be that noticeable to most players.
Sadly, Blizzard is probably not inclined to rework their entire network code this far along in the development process.
I wonder what made them choose peer to peer to begin with?
A possible solution to the problem that doesn't require a complete reworking of their network code, would be to have network filters for automatic matchmaking so that only people connecting from the same region will be matched up, regardless of the region they are connecting to.
The server switch could then simply be prefaced with a notice about how the switch will likely result in additional lag in custom games and longer search times for automatic matchmaking.
Region switching would then be an option tailored specifically for the players wanting to trade lower latency with higher latency in exchange for the ability to play mostly custom games with others outside of their region.
|
If the only concern they have is that the players native in their region experience lag when they play ladder games against people from other regions then they should just disable automated matchmaking if you switch the region. This way the players will stay on their region unless they play in tournaments or custom games with their friends on another server.
This wouldn't be the ideal solution but still better than the way it currently is.
|
Found this on digg earlier made me crack a smile =D
![[image loading]](http://www.crunchgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/cmToK.jpg)
|
On June 04 2010 08:55 uNiGNoRe wrote:
If the only concern they have is that the players native in their region experience lag when they play ladder games against people from other regions then they should just disable automated matchmaking if you switch the region. This way the players will stay on their region unless they play in tournaments or custom games with their friends on another server.
This wouldn't be the ideal solution but still better than the way it currently is.
What about people who buy a client in a specific region and then move to a different one? According to Blizzard we're stuck with a region-specific client. How will that work out? Will I be forced to play in the client's region even though I'm elsewhere in the world, or will I have to buy another copy of the game?
|
I don't see why they are incapable of providing the option of playing in other regions. If they truly wish to make sure users have a lag free experience then they will limit the automated matchmaking to their region only, while allowing custom games in any region and use a server selection system like HoN to allow players to filter for low ping games. Honestly, these features may be "low on their priority list" but it takes like zero time to implement so what could possibly be so important they cant take a few hours and add this stuff in?
My guess is the Bnet interface is so fked up there's no easy way at this point to add this stuff in. Whoever was responsible for delaying the game to work on the new and improved bnet is very close to getting the axe right now.
|
From my experience with wow and war3x, when a blue posts in that jokingly manner, it's usually good news for the community.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
