EPTBlizzard: "No plans for chatrooms, crossrealm play" - Page…
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
IrT4nkz
229 Posts
| ||
|
treason
Germany72 Posts
| ||
|
Toran7
United States160 Posts
| ||
|
cartoon]x
United States606 Posts
On May 29 2010 17:38 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: 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. Exactly. Their loyal fans are what set them apart from all other gaming companies. Word of mouth is their strongest asset. | ||
|
Ramsing
Canada233 Posts
On May 29 2010 17:59 IrT4nkz wrote: TL.net won't even exist if there weren't any chat channels I reckon. I wish someone could go to their HQ and squeeze their balls for what they're giving us. I know I wouldn't be looking at this thread, let alone this forum, if there weren't chat channels in brood war. Hell, I'd probably be playing BFBC2 instead. | ||
|
MoooN1
Germany128 Posts
whining here isnt very usefull | ||
|
teapot
United Kingdom266 Posts
I WANT CHAT CHANNELS "but guys it is a beta. I am sure they will add channels for release. They just want you to play the game not chatcraft" TO EVERYONE WHO SAID THIS FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU | ||
|
Ai52487963
United Kingdom136 Posts
On May 29 2010 17:38 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: 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. I agree that as far as a long-term business model, it is a very bad approach. But from what I can see, it feels more and more like Activison/Blizzard is becoming less and less concerned with long term business models. I feel that by centralizing BNET 2.0 as this megalithic thing around which SC2 is based, SC2 is basically serving at the whim of BNET 2.0. If they decide to axe the current bnet system for 3.0 or something (a la how xbox live for the original xbox just went down recently in favor of more support for the 360 platform's online service), then SC2 goes down with it unless they port it to 3.0. The idea isn't so much as to pander to the fanbase much anymore I don't think. They'll take community feedback to some extent, but not business advice, which I can understand. If a majority of their income is going to come from the casual gamers, then designing SC2 in a manner similar to xbox live seems like a good investment. I've noticed a lot of similarities between 2.0 and the 360 version of xbox live and the outlook doesn't look spectacular, especially if former live people are working on the bnet 2.0 platform (I may be wrong on this, but I think that's right). Casual gamers won't know what they're missing in SC2 probably and they won't mind buying SC4-5 or WC5-6 because of that I think. The flashy way of presenting something with little substance in an online gaming platform seems to be what sells, including achievements, marketplace (note similarities between live and BNET 2.0) and friends lists. I almost think that Blizzard's reputation is so strong that Activision/Blizzard can get away with selling what we would deem a less than optimal product for short term profit and suffer little to no reputation-based damage. It's such a shame, too, since there's nothing really wrong per se in SC2 as far as gameplay or customizability goes, it's just the online service that needs a significant retooling. The fact that SC2's core gameplay was delayed for so long is only so much more aggravating. Maybe Blizzard has invested too much in this to admit they were wrong, to redesign their online service model? I mean, they're dead set on the online service model they have, based off the purchasing plans for lower-income countries. I don't think BNET 2.0 is going away anytime soon. I can only hope that if it becomes more Steam-like (read: less restrictive) by DIII, then a lot of outrage will be quelled. However, I think that a lot more backlash will arise against BNET 2.0 if it's in its current state when DIII is released. It's quite a conundrum and risky endeavor to centralize such a monumental game with so many features on a system like this. If BNET 2.0 is to become Activison/Blizzard's Xbox Live (without the subscription 'fee' ), then they're headed in the right direction for money street. | ||
|
Tef
Sweden443 Posts
Public chat rooms cost money because you need to moderate them and they are littered with spam. And you don't need to chat with people to find 1on1 matches anymore. If I want to chat I can do that ingame or in those groups/clans they are going to patch after release. | ||
|
Art_of_Kill
Zaire1232 Posts
but sc2 is far away from the feeling back then when i played scBW first time and one of the biggest reason ist that you can not just chill in a channel after game to be honest if people just wont buy the game at release, blizzard will not even take a week to patch the chatchannels , servercross and all the other basics this trash battlenet 2.0 is missing into the game but i guess too many nerds/addicted will not be able to hold back and wait a few weeks before they buy the game | ||
|
Squeegy
Finland1166 Posts
Ps. GO FLASH! | ||
|
Lord_of_Chaos
Sweden372 Posts
On May 29 2010 18:25 Tef wrote: I really don't see the point with public chat rooms. Public chat rooms cost money because you need to moderate them and they are littered with spam. And you don't need to chat with people to find 1on1 matches anymore. If I want to chat I can do that ingame or in those groups/clans they are going to patch after release. You only need very very few public ones. The big ones are the ones that are "private" channels in the sense that they are run by non-blizz people. In BW these places became the "place to be" to find the good players on servers, if you wanted to play with the best players in europe you went to op ToT, no matter what clan you belonged to. Also, chat channels makes tournament organisation so much easier. You have all the people in the same place and they are all easy to find and reach with information quickly. Believe me, without chat channels the workload for tournament admins at least double. Third, it's needed for easy organisation of clan wars. You all gather in one channel, discuss who faces who and then play. As easy as that. On May 29 2010 18:32 Squeegy wrote: Didn't he say something about chat for groups and clans? So, I'm wondering if this uproar about chat channels is a bit baseless. (Uproar about servers is totally justified though.) Just having the old system allowed chat channels for clans and groups AND allowed everything else. No matter how they implement this function for clans and groups it will be more hassle to get everyone there for a tournament or a clan war, and outright impossible to just slide in there and hang with the best players on the server and play some matches with them. | ||
|
Latham
9588 Posts
On May 29 2010 18:25 Tef wrote: I really don't see the point with public chat rooms. Public chat rooms cost money because you need to moderate them and they are littered with spam. And you don't need to chat with people to find 1on1 matches anymore. If I want to chat I can do that ingame or in those groups/clans they are going to patch after release. And how exactly are you going to chat to that clan? Make a party of 28 and spam away with 27 other people in a 5x5 small window??? Get real. Chat channels might need moderation, but with smart design like WC3s and a little better "anti-spam precautions" chat channels could be perfect. Give the players the power to create private channels and give the players the possibility of voting for a moderator for the channel every 10-15 mins. If we could elect mods for channels bots/spammers BM ppl would get banned on sight. | ||
|
Lord_of_Chaos
Sweden372 Posts
Don't leave it to the majority though, that way private channels risks get taken over by BM clans full of idiots. | ||
|
spinesheath
Germany8679 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 39582
317 Posts
Poll: Would you give SC2 a one star amazon rating to protest BNET? It's things like this, which influence the "childish" gamer stereotype we all want to avoid... When the Spore DRM incident happened, what I saw were hundreds of thousands of immature man children, throwing tantrums because EA wouldn't let people have their game for free. If we really want ESPORTS to succeed in the west, encouraging this kind of /b/-esque hate is out of the question. | ||
|
Liquid`Nazgul
22427 Posts
On May 29 2010 18:25 Tef wrote: I really don't see the point with public chat rooms. Public chat rooms cost money because you need to moderate them and they are littered with spam. And you don't need to chat with people to find 1on1 matches anymore. If I want to chat I can do that ingame or in those groups/clans they are going to patch after release. People want chat rooms for private use. Blizzard doesn't need to moderate them and they cost no money. They are moderated by the people in charge of it and spam is very very rare because of this in the good channels. If there is spam it probably isn't a good channel and won't have people in it. This whole moderation argument is completely worthless. You might not want to chat with people, but if bnet channels didn't exist there's a good chance Liquid` and www.teamliquid.net would never have been created, so at least realize the importance of chat to others. Chat channels are how friendships were built and out of those friendships clans came to exist. The sense of community that always existed in SC:BW was no doubt influenced by the way bnet worked and how everyone could easily meet up with each other in channels. | ||
|
leveller
Sweden1840 Posts
| ||
|
skeldark
Germany2223 Posts
i will not say its no problem. i meet many of my bw friends in channels first time. I think split server is a bigger problem and i dont mean "oh my god the pros must buy 9 copys" the total fans and pros will just do it! But no normal player will buy a 2. copy. The hole community will split more and more each day after release and even if sc2 will have success, there will be 3 communitys with totaly own sites and bo and tatics in 1 year / without big connection to each other. by watching replay even now in beta you find total diffrent BO on the diffrent server 30 min ago i hear in a chat  NO not in bnet  Who wanne play? ME! Us? no eu! oh ok someone else? it starts to get normal ...So i think its not the lan not the channel not the split it the road blizzard is going. Blizzard wants total controll over everything in sc2 and they dont understand they can have a little controll over a big big thing or total controll over a peace of +++++. So dont post only channels channels channels in all forums (here and bnet) let them know we dont have a problem with 1 feature we have a problem with the path they are going. | ||
|
ganil
253 Posts
That's lame ~_~. | ||
| ||
