EPT
no chat rooms i feel like i'm in the fucking stoneage again. sigh @ blizz wow ruined them forever. Blizzard: "No plans for chatrooms, crossrealm play" - Page…
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
groms
Canada1017 Posts
no chat rooms i feel like i'm in the fucking stoneage again. sigh @ blizz wow ruined them forever. | ||
|
zimz
United States510 Posts
| ||
|
cartoon]x
United States606 Posts
| ||
|
Kyuki
Sweden1867 Posts
| ||
|
Soulforged
Latvia981 Posts
I mean come one. Fckin achievements, facebook integration over chat channels? I could see how separate realms could be caused by huge lag on other servers, and lack of LAN in best case could lead to solid antihack on bnet in the future, but having no chat channels is totally retarded. | ||
|
Joseki
United States200 Posts
| ||
|
Crazyeyes
Canada1342 Posts
What's the problem with the facebook addon? I realize chat rooms should be added, and that the vast, vast majority of the gamign community won't really have any use for it... but does it actually cause any PROBLEMS? From waht I understood, the problem was that they're wasing their time adding a practically worthlses facebook integration feature and ignoring thingsl ike chat rooms that everyone actually wants... but I'm getting the feeling there's more to it than that. People just won't stop bitching about it. I see posts calling to remove the facebook shit all the time. Making them waste time to remove a feature that's already working (assuming it works...) would really just be a bigger waste of time. so uh... what? | ||
|
Soulforged
Latvia981 Posts
On May 29 2010 17:24 Crazyeyes wrote: From waht I understood, the problem was that they're wasing their time adding a practically worthlses facebook integration feature and ignoring thingsl ike chat rooms that everyone actually wants... but I'm getting the feeling there's more to it than that. People just won't stop bitching about it. I see posts calling to remove the facebook shit all the time. Nah, we're just a bit too angry and irrational. Simply having Blizzard do something completely useless instead of normal bnet features is sickening. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On May 29 2010 17:24 Crazyeyes wrote: Alright, I'm definately missing something here. What's the problem with the facebook addon? I realize chat rooms should be added, and that the vast, vast majority of the gamign community won't really have any use for it... but does it actually cause any PROBLEMS? From waht I understood, the problem was that they're wasing their time adding a practically worthlses facebook integration feature and ignoring thingsl ike chat rooms that everyone actually wants... but I'm getting the feeling there's more to it than that. People just won't stop bitching about it. I see posts calling to remove the facebook shit all the time. Making them waste time to remove a feature that's already working (assuming it works...) would really just be a bigger waste of time. so uh... what? I guess it's not that much of a problem other than it's ridiculous. I think it's a shame to have it in the game. I'm not saying it should be removed. It's just useless and it's a retarded way to bring all the cool facebook kids to SC2. I despise facebook. | ||
|
Ai52487963
United Kingdom136 Posts
On May 29 2010 17:15 cartoon]x wrote: ...This is a bad business decision, I can assure you..... I disagree. I think that Activision/Blizzard is going to reap an absolute fortune off SC2 and the two expansions. No amount of MW2-style boycotting is going to keep people from buying it, even if chat channels are the SC2 dedicated server-level fiasco. Activision/Blizzard has made it pretty clear, I think, that they're not focused on long-term profits, but short-term (read: less than 5 years). SC2 is episodic to maximize sales most likely and the sheer fanbase of SC1 will be more than enough to keep SC2 long enough for profit within a 5 year timespan. If they wanted SC2 to last longer than 5 years, to 10 or 15, the super centralized architecture of BNET2.0 wouldn't exist. Since DIII is going to be run on BNET 2.0, it will most likely befall the same problems of constant connectivity, facebook, or whatever gripes we currently have that Activision/Blizzard thinks is pertinent to the online experience. What's sad is that it's not SC2 that's at fault. Sure it's not perfectly balanced yet, but no one expected it to be. I think that after the Void, it will be a great game, but the interface it's delivered by is an absolute failure. It's shiny, pretty and soulless. By pandering to the casual gamer, who plays a game for a few months then buys another, they are making an excellent business decision. | ||
|
Liquid`Nazgul
22427 Posts
On May 29 2010 17:24 Crazyeyes wrote: Alright, I'm definately missing something here. What's the problem with the facebook addon? I realize chat rooms should be added, and that the vast, vast majority of the gamign community won't really have any use for it... but does it actually cause any PROBLEMS? From waht I understood, the problem was that they're wasing their time adding a practically worthlses facebook integration feature and ignoring thingsl ike chat rooms that everyone actually wants... but I'm getting the feeling there's more to it than that. People just won't stop bitching about it. I see posts calling to remove the facebook shit all the time. Making them waste time to remove a feature that's already working (assuming it works...) would really just be a bigger waste of time. so uh... what? There's nothing actually wrong with a facebook addon if it was the gazilionth function they were offering, after all the important ones already existed. It being added while bnet2 is still a pile of shit is just.. insulting. In itself it does no harm. On May 29 2010 17:31 Ai52487963 wrote: I disagree. I think that Activision/Blizzard is going to reap an absolute fortune off SC2 and the two expansions. No amount of MW2-style boycotting is going to keep people from buying it, even if chat channels are the SC2 dedicated server-level fiasco. Activision/Blizzard has made it pretty clear, I think, that they're not focused on long-term profits, but short-term (read: less than 5 years). SC2 is episodic to maximize sales most likely and the sheer fanbase of SC1 will be more than enough to keep SC2 long enough for profit within a 5 year timespan. If they wanted SC2 to last longer than 5 years, to 10 or 15, the super centralized architecture of BNET2.0 wouldn't exist. Since DIII is going to be run on BNET 2.0, it will most likely befall the same problems of constant connectivity, facebook, or whatever gripes we currently have that Activision/Blizzard thinks is pertinent to the online experience. What's sad is that it's not SC2 that's at fault. Sure it's not perfectly balanced yet, but no one expected it to be. I think that after the Void, it will be a great game, but the interface it's delivered by is an absolute failure. It's shiny, pretty and soulless. By pandering to the casual gamer, who plays a game for a few months then buys another, they are making an excellent business decision. I more and more think this is a terrible business decision. Yes SC2 will sell huge numbers but the reason why SC2 will sell huge is because of Blizzards reputation. If they slowly ruin this reputation it will most definitely hurt SC4-SC5 WC5-WC6 sales. | ||
|
Jimmy Raynor
902 Posts
There must be something everyone is missing | ||
|
Crazyeyes
Canada1342 Posts
On May 29 2010 17:39 Jimmy Raynor wrote: Ok man, no need for a long post, no need for endless explanations, tell me how in the fucking hell does it hurt Blizzard programmers to make god damn chat box at the bottom of the screen. It is not connected with tough business decisions, it does not hurt the casual gamer, it doesn't do anything bad. There must be something everyone is missing I think that's the problem. We are all missing whatever this is. It just makes no sense. At all. and Nazgul has a good point. I mean, going for the longrun is definately going to be mroe profitable than a burst of sales. Hell, I was in WalMart yesterday and I saw the SC1 BattleChest going for 24.95ish CDN. Really one way or another it doesn't matter. They're giong to make all the money in the world anyways. | ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
| ||
|
RedTerror
New Zealand742 Posts
| ||
|
Kyuki
Sweden1867 Posts
Jesus christ, I just cant belive my eyes - so disappointed. :/ | ||
|
Liquid`Nazgul
22427 Posts
On May 29 2010 17:52 ViruX wrote: Public chat channels were shit, do you guys honestly want to listen to 12 year olds complain how marauders are overpowered? Define public? The ones in the bnet list were always barely used but there were tons of great channels besides that. People just want to move freely around bnet from channel to channel so they can meet up with friends and try to find quality non ladder games in others. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On May 29 2010 17:52 ViruX wrote: Public chat channels were shit, do you guys honestly want to listen to 12 year olds complain how marauders are overpowered? I read what I want to read. | ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
On May 29 2010 17:52 ViruX wrote: Public chat channels were shit, do you guys honestly want to listen to 12 year olds complain how marauders are overpowered? yea don't be retarded man. If there were no public channels, that would be fine. But we still need private channels at the least. | ||
|
tnud
Sweden2233 Posts
Therefore I am | ||
| ||
