|
The private channels bashiok refers to are nothing more than clan and group chats... nothing new to see here.... everyone reads way to much into these one liners cause they want to believe that blizz will make it right.
Blizzard isn't going to acknowledge the communities dissatisfaction with the state of bnet 2.0 and will do just what they've been doing all along, leave us to speculating among ourselves....
Vote with your wallet people, don't buy the game at launch, cancel your pre-orders.
We've waited for SC2 for over 10yrs so it doesn't hurt to not go buy the game right off the bat, just give it some time and see if/how they address the issues (i.e. cross realm play, chat channels, etc) after launch as they've so far claimed many of things we want will come after release in patches...
|
On June 15 2010 11:48 Goga[OEP] wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 09:56 Archerofaiur wrote:there is an ongoing active discussion with bashiok over moderation and chat channels (he seems to be implying that blizzard cant afford to hire enough moderators to police BNET 2.0) While im organizing all the blue responces ill just post the link so you guys can check it out http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25399921649&postId=253972569059&sid=3000#75
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?
-Bashiok
This just further illustrates the fact that they care about money. I mean how much would it cost to hire a few moderators to go through spam reported by other users? Not a lot comparing to the sales they will make from this game.
WoW uses over 2k game masters, let's say SC2 uses 1/4th of that. Let's say the game lasts 4 years. 40k/yr salary.
500 x 4 x 40000 = $80,000,000
That's lowballing it. And they don't get monthly fees to recoup that. It's more costly than you'd think.
|
I've been avoiding these forums and the Bnet ones like the plague over the past two weeks just because I am willing to wait to see what Blizz has to say in their supposed comprehensive address before I completely jump ship forever.
I am still willing to hear what they have to say, but as time passes I get more and more antzy...
I'm not expecting the world here, I have what I feel to be realistic expectations. I want some evidence that they care what we have to say and will make changes when/if needed. And, also important, will just give us a good freaking reason why something isn't in, rather than insult our collective intelligence with bs statements that don't mean anything. Obviously the decision to keep LAN out had nothing to do with "making Bnet so good you don't want LAN", so why keep giving us that stupid ass line that doesn't make sense?
I'm not angry anymore, just saddened. If things don't change I'll probably just push SC2 out of my conciousness and forget about it completely.
|
On June 15 2010 12:35 Plethora wrote:
I've been avoiding these forums and the Bnet ones like the plague over the past two weeks just because I am willing to wait to see what Blizz has to say in their supposed comprehensive address before I completely jump ship forever.
I am still willing to hear what they have to say, but as time passes I get more and more antzy...
I'm not expecting the world here, I have what I feel to be realistic expectations. I want some evidence that they care what we have to say and will make changes when/if needed. And, also important, will just give us a good freaking reason why something isn't in, rather than insult our collective intelligence with bs statements that don't mean anything. Obviously the decision to keep LAN out had nothing to do with "making Bnet so good you don't want LAN", so why keep giving us that stupid ass line that doesn't make sense?
I'm not angry anymore, just saddened. If things don't change I'll probably just push SC2 out of my conciousness and forget about it completely.
Just a good example of bad PR at work here. It's just so disheartening to see problems like this hit the surface and watch the threads pile up without a response, like in this case. And is they continue to grow and fester, you have to wonder, why doesn't blizzard just squash this now?
This is really all they have to say, and im not going to put this in a quote box because it will get me in trouble when people skim the post,
Blizzard Rep: "Hey guys, just checking in here. I thought you should all know that we are working diligently on the items you all have mentioned. First up is the chat rooms that you have all been asking about. Here at Blizzard we have heard all the words you had to say, and we're working on getting something in the game. As per usual, we like to be our product as clean as possible, so we won't simply be whipping something up and shoving it in your face. Will it be in when the game launches? Tough to say. But we have been listening, and we want to provide a solution that will better the communication of the community on our new Battle.net 2.0 framework! As far as the other gripes people have, we will get to them soon, but other things are on our plate currently."
You see that? That's all they have to say, instead of reading all the sadness... =(
|
What bad PR? They have said no lan, cross realm play and no public chat for months now. They have been straight up about all of this. You don't want to wait until they patch in clan chat, private group channels and allowing everyone to switch realms when they feel like then don't pay for the game or get over it. They will still sell millions of copies without any of that.
|
On June 15 2010 13:08 Baarn wrote:
What bad PR? They have said no lan, cross realm play and no public chat for months now. They have been straight up about all of this. You don't want to wait until they patch in clan chat, private group channels and allowing everyone to switch realms when they feel like then don't pay for the game or get over it. They will still sell millions of copies without any of that.
What bad PR?
How about....
::chuckle:: You really want chat rooms?
|
On June 15 2010 13:10 Joey.rumz wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 13:08 Baarn wrote:
What bad PR? They have said no lan, cross realm play and no public chat for months now. They have been straight up about all of this. You don't want to wait until they patch in clan chat, private group channels and allowing everyone to switch realms when they feel like then don't pay for the game or get over it. They will still sell millions of copies without any of that. What bad PR? How about....
Well you got a response, at least, to the multitude of dumb threads about all this shit a certain group wants and isn't gonna get right now or at all. I'd laugh at all of you too. It's not like you are gonna buy it anyway, right?
|
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.
Well my WoW address has been leaked / hacked / whatever, because I am getting virus emails now from someone trying to impersonate Blizzard. I stopped playing WoW over 2 years ago and couldnt care less about the game now.
Something to educate people on the word "boycott": Charles Cunningham Boycott.
On June 15 2010 13:16 Baarn wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 13:10 Joey.rumz wrote:On June 15 2010 13:08 Baarn wrote:
What bad PR? They have said no lan, cross realm play and no public chat for months now. They have been straight up about all of this. You don't want to wait until they patch in clan chat, private group channels and allowing everyone to switch realms when they feel like then don't pay for the game or get over it. They will still sell millions of copies without any of that. What bad PR? How about....
::chuckle:: You really want chat rooms?
Well you got a response, at least, to the multitude of dumb threads about all this shit a certain group wants and isn't gonna get right now or at all. I'd laugh at all of you too. It's not like you are gonna buy it anyway, right?
Starcraft 2 was the one computer game I really waited for ... for years. Now I wont buy the game, but it probably wont matter, because you can sell dung with the right advertisements and Blizzard still has its awesome reputation and knows how to make those.
|
guys guys relax, if blizzard doesn't make their bnet what we want, someone will develop a third party server and we'll just use that
Who knows, maybe this is blizzard's way of cutting bandwidth costs. After you buy the game you use custom sc2 p2p software and use your own bandwidth to host/lan.
|
On June 15 2010 11:48 Goga[OEP] wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 09:56 Archerofaiur wrote:there is an ongoing active discussion with bashiok over moderation and chat channels (he seems to be implying that blizzard cant afford to hire enough moderators to police BNET 2.0) While im organizing all the blue responces ill just post the link so you guys can check it out http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25399921649&postId=253972569059&sid=3000#75
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?
-Bashiok
This just further illustrates the fact that they care about money. I mean how much would it cost to hire a few moderators to go through spam reported by other users? Not a lot comparing to the sales they will make from this game.
You guys seem to think that the best way to run a game company is to completely disregard expense, practicality, deadlines, focused design goals, and organization.
I can't think of a single good game that was made under those circumstances.
|
On June 15 2010 12:20 Takkara wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 11:48 Goga[OEP] wrote:On June 15 2010 09:56 Archerofaiur wrote:there is an ongoing active discussion with bashiok over moderation and chat channels (he seems to be implying that blizzard cant afford to hire enough moderators to police BNET 2.0) While im organizing all the blue responces ill just post the link so you guys can check it out http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25399921649&postId=253972569059&sid=3000#75
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?
-Bashiok
This just further illustrates the fact that they care about money. I mean how much would it cost to hire a few moderators to go through spam reported by other users? Not a lot comparing to the sales they will make from this game. WoW uses over 2k game masters, let's say SC2 uses 1/4th of that. Let's say the game lasts 4 years. 40k/yr salary. 500 x 4 x 40000 = $80,000,000 That's lowballing it. And they don't get monthly fees to recoup that. It's more costly than you'd think.
Your estimates are wildly over-blown. A more realistic number of B.net GMs is likely 100. And many will be split between SC2 and D3. The time investment needed to police B.net is probably only three years, assuming this is when the last D3 expansion comes out. Lastly the salaries of employees are much lower in many regions outside of the U.S. I think an average salary of 20k (or less) is more realistic.
100 x 3 x 20,000 = $6,000,000
Now, six million dollars spent on two games over a three year period equates to only an additional three million into the development budget for each game. That is well worth the cost of investment given the stated goals for Blizzards new B.net.
I think my numbers illustrate that the "real" cost of monitoring B.net is negligible. Furthermore, the monetized UGC will further offset cost on the part of Blizzard.
|
On June 15 2010 12:35 Plethora wrote:I'm not expecting the world here, I have what I feel to be realistic expectations.
I hear you. I have one simple problem: I'm moving to a different country a few months after release. I've scoured the SC2 beta forums as well as this forum looking for a simple answer: will I be forced to play in the region I buy the game in or will I be able to play in the realm where I'll be living? I expected to find a simple answer because and I've never played a video game where this was even a potential problem. I didn't find an answer, so I e-mailed Blizzard support. Their reply? Go to the SC2 forums. I replied that I, of course, already did that and I e-mailed them because I couldn't find an answer there. I just got a reply to my second e-mail:
Blizzard Entertainment - World of Warcraft
Thank you for submitting this information. We are committed to making World of Warcraft as enjoyable as possible. We apologize if our GM support staff has been unable to resolve this issue to your satisfaction. Your concerns will be forwarded to the appropriate departments. While we cannot guarantee a response, we can assure you it will be read and addressed.
If you have any further questions or problems regarding World of Warcraft, please feel free to contact us at WowGmFeedback-US@blizzard.com.
This is from Blizzard. I would have never expected this kind of incompetence and disrespect from a company like Blizzard, which was, up until very recently, one of the few companies in any industry I had any kind of trust in. All I had was a simple question and I'm left with this bitter realization that Blizzard isn't the company I thought it was. I cancelled my preorder and I've lost all the excitement over SC2 I've built up over the past few years.
|
On June 15 2010 13:48 DigitalD[562] wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 12:20 Takkara wrote:On June 15 2010 11:48 Goga[OEP] wrote:On June 15 2010 09:56 Archerofaiur wrote:there is an ongoing active discussion with bashiok over moderation and chat channels (he seems to be implying that blizzard cant afford to hire enough moderators to police BNET 2.0) While im organizing all the blue responces ill just post the link so you guys can check it out http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25399921649&postId=253972569059&sid=3000#75
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?
-Bashiok
This just further illustrates the fact that they care about money. I mean how much would it cost to hire a few moderators to go through spam reported by other users? Not a lot comparing to the sales they will make from this game. WoW uses over 2k game masters, let's say SC2 uses 1/4th of that. Let's say the game lasts 4 years. 40k/yr salary. 500 x 4 x 40000 = $80,000,000 That's lowballing it. And they don't get monthly fees to recoup that. It's more costly than you'd think. Your estimates are wildly over-blown. A more realistic number of B.net GMs is likely 100. And many will be split between SC2 and D3. The time investment needed to police B.net is probably only three years, assuming this is when the last D3 expansion comes out. Lastly the salaries of employees are much lower in many regions outside of the U.S. I think an average salary of 20k (or less) is more realistic. 100 x 3 x 20,000 = $6,000,000 Now, six million dollars spent on two games over a three year period equates to only an additional three million into the development budget for each game. That is well worth the cost of investment given the stated goals for Blizzards new B.net. I think my numbers illustrate that the "real" cost of monitoring B.net is negligible. Furthermore, the monetized UGC will further offset cost on the part of Blizzard.
You really think you can monitor and police potentially millions of users worldwide 24 hours a day with only 100 people? You really think the game will last only 3 years? You really think the average salary of all their worldwide employees and support staff will be only 20,000?
I'm sorry but you're massively massively underestimating things. Neither of us has the figures in front of us, so it's fruitless to take this argument much farther than this, but I'm sorry, you're just way underestimating.
|
On June 15 2010 14:11 Takkara wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 13:48 DigitalD[562] wrote:On June 15 2010 12:20 Takkara wrote:On June 15 2010 11:48 Goga[OEP] wrote:On June 15 2010 09:56 Archerofaiur wrote:there is an ongoing active discussion with bashiok over moderation and chat channels (he seems to be implying that blizzard cant afford to hire enough moderators to police BNET 2.0) While im organizing all the blue responces ill just post the link so you guys can check it out http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25399921649&postId=253972569059&sid=3000#75
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?
-Bashiok
This just further illustrates the fact that they care about money. I mean how much would it cost to hire a few moderators to go through spam reported by other users? Not a lot comparing to the sales they will make from this game. WoW uses over 2k game masters, let's say SC2 uses 1/4th of that. Let's say the game lasts 4 years. 40k/yr salary. 500 x 4 x 40000 = $80,000,000 That's lowballing it. And they don't get monthly fees to recoup that. It's more costly than you'd think. Your estimates are wildly over-blown. A more realistic number of B.net GMs is likely 100. And many will be split between SC2 and D3. The time investment needed to police B.net is probably only three years, assuming this is when the last D3 expansion comes out. Lastly the salaries of employees are much lower in many regions outside of the U.S. I think an average salary of 20k (or less) is more realistic. 100 x 3 x 20,000 = $6,000,000 Now, six million dollars spent on two games over a three year period equates to only an additional three million into the development budget for each game. That is well worth the cost of investment given the stated goals for Blizzards new B.net. I think my numbers illustrate that the "real" cost of monitoring B.net is negligible. Furthermore, the monetized UGC will further offset cost on the part of Blizzard. You really think you can monitor and police potentially millions of users worldwide 24 hours a day with only 100 people? You really think the game will last only 3 years? You really think the average salary of all their worldwide employees and support staff will be only 20,000? I'm sorry but you're massively massively underestimating things. Neither of us has the figures in front of us, so it's fruitless to take this argument much farther than this, but I'm sorry, you're just way underestimating.
you don't need to police every single user of bnet though, that's the thing...
|
Why do you need GMs for BNet? There are no disputes to solve and they wont be fast enough to handle spam. There are also no bosses to reset and "the ladder" is not some big tournament where you could argue that you won, because you were ahead prior to disconnecting. So what do you need all those people for?
Personally I would think that you primarily need technical staff which will just check if the servers are running and not overheating ...
|
Man it's always so funny listening to gamers talk business. First, the cost for hiring someone is never just their wage. It is also benefits (e.g., insurance, vacation, workers comp., free lunches, bonuses, whatever) and overhead (e.g., additional office space, desks, electricity, computers, other supplies). Someone who makes 40k will often cost a company around 60k.
Second, if Blizzard were to hire GMs, they wouldn't go review the resumes of thousands of people, hire them individually, and then setup a bunch of cubicles. They would likely enter into a flat rate third-party contract with a customer service firm, who would then have some cheap labor in India do it.
|
On June 15 2010 14:17 Rabiator wrote:
Why do you need GMs for BNet? There are no disputes to solve and they wont be fast enough to handle spam. There are also no bosses to reset and "the ladder" is not some big tournament where you could argue that you won, because you were ahead prior to disconnecting. So what do you need all those people for?
Personally I would think that you primarily need technical staff which will just check if the servers are running and not overheating ...
Like forums need moderators, public chat channels with million+ users needs game masters. It's just a fact of life.
At least, it's a fact as Blizzard sees it. Certainly they could choose to leave the channels as the wild wild west, but they think that's not in their or the players' best interest or it's too high of a risk.
On June 15 2010 14:24 mav wrote:
Second, if Blizzard were to hire GMs, they wouldn't go review the resumes of thousands of people, hire them individually, and then setup a bunch of cubicles. They would likely enter into a flat rate third-party contract with a customer service firm, who would then have some cheap labor in India do it.
Except that they don't do that. They hire the people, and set up the cubicles. In each of the regions (NA, EU, Asia) that they run servers.
|
Except that they don't do that. They hire the people, and set up the cubicles. In each of the regions (NA, EU, Asia) that they run servers.
Somehow I doubt that. I'm not doubting that they have some customer service people in their office space, but I'm also sure that they engage a customer service firm for a lot of their stuff.
|
On June 15 2010 14:25 Takkara wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 14:17 Rabiator wrote:
Why do you need GMs for BNet? There are no disputes to solve and they wont be fast enough to handle spam. There are also no bosses to reset and "the ladder" is not some big tournament where you could argue that you won, because you were ahead prior to disconnecting. So what do you need all those people for?
Personally I would think that you primarily need technical staff which will just check if the servers are running and not overheating ... Like forums need moderators, public chat channels with million+ users needs game masters. It's just a fact of life. At least, it's a fact as Blizzard sees it. Certainly they could choose to leave the channels as the wild wild west, but they think that's not in their or the players' best interest or it's too high of a risk.
In other words they want to be our mom and dad?
What you describe are moderators and not GMs. GMs can / have to do more than just solve disputes, but moderators just ban spammers and maybe are allowed to answer questions. You only need 2-3 of those per region and not the ridiculous estimate of 100 ... Apart from that the technical crew which keeps the servers from overheating (I seem to recall one episode from a WoW patch, where the crew locked themselves out and could only restart the servers with a delay after a patch?), but you need those people in any case, but the numbers of your "service personnel" is flexible.
|
United States47024 Posts
On June 15 2010 14:35 Rabiator wrote:
What you describe are moderators and not GMs. GMs can / have to do more than just solve disputes, but moderators just ban spammers and maybe are allowed to answer questions. You only need 2-3 of those per region and not the ridiculous estimate of 100 ... Apart from that the technical crew which keeps the servers from overheating (I seem to recall one episode from a WoW patch, where the crew locked themselves out and could only restart the servers with a delay after a patch?), but you need those people in any case, but the numbers of your "service personnel" is flexible.
2-3 is definitely low-balling it, given that there has to be some level of availability even on off-hours, and a large majority of requests/reports/questions are going to come on weekends. 2-3 people can't reasonably cover 24 hours, 7 days a week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
