|
I really want to see those groups and if they can be formed with random people and not only with your FRIEND LIST.
that's the thing captain peabody
They don't make it clear if this groups will only be made by Friend list or if they are OPEN TO PUBLIC (like joingame without game name roflbbq)
|
Captain Peabody, a promise of essential game features is not the same thing as essential game features. Not from Blizzard, not any more. I already posted how blizzard previously said there would be something close to semi lan.
|
Rated 1 star in amazon, add a statement on Product Amazon Forum.
|
The only thing I liked in that interview was that you can put SC1 units into custom maps and publish them for the community
|
Almost at 2000
Poll: Would you give SC2 a one star amazon rating to protest BNET?Yes (6508) 83% No (1331) 17% 7839 total votes Your vote: Would you give SC2 a one star amazon rating to protest BNET? (Vote): Yes (Vote): No
|
I don't mean to stir up a hornets nest but who chat channels = completely irrelivant when they do plan to add /some/ kind of chat with groups. If you can make a group called "TLInvitational5" - bam, you've got chat channels - stop worrying about the chat channels, this means ALL of you.
HOWEVER
Why the hell are you guys not raging on this fucking issue with region locking? This is 10,000 times worse and only 1/5'th of you guys even seem to notice it, did you not read the article? This is seriously so so much worse, it's insulting, it's wrong, it's deceptive and it's greedy fucking shit to be honest.
TL, stop worrying about chat, some kind of community discussion will be added, DO worry about region locking, as someone said - the high end gamers here at TL who compete over 3 regions will be forced to buy this game NINE TIMES......... nine times. that is the problem, big big time :/
|
my mother told me not to talk to people i dont know .
anyway chat channel that sooooooooo 2002 .
agree about the region lock , that kinda worst .
|
On May 29 2010 22:33 Captain Peabody wrote:Show nested quote +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? A few days ago, someone posted a thread where he pointed out that the public chat channel system in Bnet was basically a huge mess and a failure. In that thread, everyone immediately cried foul and pointed out that all they really wanted were private clan chat channels, which is the only place people hung out anyway. Now, Frank Pearce has confirmed that there will be private clan chat channels, but there will not be public chat channels...and everyone is baying for his blood. To be fair, perhaps they meant merely private chat channels that were not clan-related. But most of the examples people brought up were clan chat channels. Bashiok also recently posted basically that to the best of his knowledge nothing has changed in this regard, and what Browder and Sigaty said about a month ago still holds true...namely, that while they have no plans for chat rooms a la Bnet, they're planning to create a more topical, focused discussion groups with moderation. See: Show nested quote +Chris Sigaty said: One of the biggest features that I'd like to see get in as soon as possible that won't be in there for launch is Groups. Groups is a concept of creating an entity like a map-making community so they can chat with each other and hang out. I don't have a date on that yet. It's past the tournament patch but its definitely one of the earlier features we'd like to see. Whether it happens in the patch or it happens in Expansion One, I don't know yet. There's a huge list of stuff on the Battle.net side that we really want to have happen but we don't have dates on it. Beyond that you're talking about actual constructions different than a group-like clan, I don't even have dates on that stuff, for now. I don't think that's in right now for the tournament patch. So...no public chat channels, but the equivalent of clan chat channels post launch, and so-called "groups" that are basically focused, moderated chat rooms, also post-launch. I fail to understand the utter rage this is creating.
This rage has been building up ever since people began to become worried about the game (First Blizzcon when it was playable). Since then, Blizzard made one bullshit statement after another (No LAN, splitting up the game into three parts, etc).
This was the straw that broke the camel's back. People are simply not putting up with Blizzard's direction anymore because everything they have done with SC2 is in direct conflict with how the Blizzard we used to love did things. People are finally seeing how much the company that rewrote an entire game based on fan reactions has changed.
|
On May 29 2010 23:07 KungKras wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2010 22:33 Captain Peabody wrote: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? A few days ago, someone posted a thread where he pointed out that the public chat channel system in Bnet was basically a huge mess and a failure. In that thread, everyone immediately cried foul and pointed out that all they really wanted were private clan chat channels, which is the only place people hung out anyway. Now, Frank Pearce has confirmed that there will be private clan chat channels, but there will not be public chat channels...and everyone is baying for his blood. To be fair, perhaps they meant merely private chat channels that were not clan-related. But most of the examples people brought up were clan chat channels. Bashiok also recently posted basically that to the best of his knowledge nothing has changed in this regard, and what Browder and Sigaty said about a month ago still holds true...namely, that while they have no plans for chat rooms a la Bnet, they're planning to create a more topical, focused discussion groups with moderation. See: Chris Sigaty said: One of the biggest features that I'd like to see get in as soon as possible that won't be in there for launch is Groups. Groups is a concept of creating an entity like a map-making community so they can chat with each other and hang out. I don't have a date on that yet. It's past the tournament patch but its definitely one of the earlier features we'd like to see. Whether it happens in the patch or it happens in Expansion One, I don't know yet. There's a huge list of stuff on the Battle.net side that we really want to have happen but we don't have dates on it. Beyond that you're talking about actual constructions different than a group-like clan, I don't even have dates on that stuff, for now. I don't think that's in right now for the tournament patch. So...no public chat channels, but the equivalent of clan chat channels post launch, and so-called "groups" that are basically focused, moderated chat rooms, also post-launch. I fail to understand the utter rage this is creating. This rage has been building up ever since people began to become worried about the game (First Blizzcon when it was playable). Since then, Blizzard made one bullshit statement after another (No LAN, splitting up the game into three parts, etc). This was the straw that broke the camel's back. People are simply not putting up with Blizzard's direction anymore because everything they have done with SC2 is in direct conflict with how the Blizzard we used to love did things. People are finally seeing how much the company that rewrote an entire game based on fan reactions has changed.
So true, so true -_- And I agree with post above me that the way blizz decided to hamper e-sports internationally is a far worse problem compared to the lack of chat-channels. But I do see why people fel insulted when he asks do you really want chat-channels, like we havn't been asking them about it in every interveiw they had >.< just make me wanna rage!!!
|
On May 29 2010 23:01 Archerofaiur wrote:Almost at 2000 Poll: Would you give SC2 a one star amazon rating to protest BNET?Yes (6508) 83% No (1331) 17% 7839 total votes Your vote: Would you give SC2 a one star amazon rating to protest BNET? (Vote): Yes (Vote): No
I can't believe you're going out of your way to kick the developers of this game in the nuts just because one employee made a PR blunder. I just lost a whole lot of respect for you.
|
Do you really want chat rooms?
This statement is a PR disaster whether you care about chat channels or not. Of course people want chat rooms, even with their own beta feedback forums this is obvious.
|
Good god that was so depressing to read.
I haven't looked forward to a game this much since Zelda:OoT, and it seems Blizzard are doing everything they can to screw this up. How can he even ask 'Do you really want chat channels?' That is probably the most demanded feature of the whole damn B.net package, how can you have sucha community centric game without some chat channels?
This just baffles me. Its like Blizzard drew up a list of all the possible ways they can mess this thing up, and just did that list. I really hope they can turn this round but I'm losing the faith in that happening.
|
Voteing this game down just because of small stuff missing is going to hurt more in the long run.
|
On May 29 2010 23:32 Zato-1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2010 23:01 Archerofaiur wrote:Almost at 2000 Poll: Would you give SC2 a one star amazon rating to protest BNET?Yes (6508) 83% No (1331) 17% 7839 total votes Your vote: Would you give SC2 a one star amazon rating to protest BNET? (Vote): Yes (Vote): No
I can't believe you're going out of your way to kick the developers of this game in the nuts just because one employee made a PR blunder. I just lost a whole lot of respect for you.
"kick the developers in the nuts"????
yah sure man. Far be it for me and so many others of the community to voice our displeasure with the current version of battlenet which is what rating systems are for. I love starcraft not frank pearce, not facebook, not activision blizzard. And I will do everything I can to ensure that Starcraft 2 is the best game possible. Including finding ways for the community to voice to Blizzard our frustration since for some god knows reason they missed it so far.
To be perfectly honest your position kinda reminds me of + Show Spoiler +
"LEAVE BLIZZARD ALONE!"
|
On May 29 2010 23:40 Archerofaiur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2010 23:32 Zato-1 wrote:On May 29 2010 23:01 Archerofaiur wrote:Almost at 2000 Poll: Would you give SC2 a one star amazon rating to protest BNET?Yes (6508) 83% No (1331) 17% 7839 total votes Your vote: Would you give SC2 a one star amazon rating to protest BNET? (Vote): Yes (Vote): No
I can't believe you're going out of your way to kick the developers of this game in the nuts just because one employee made a PR blunder. I just lost a whole lot of respect for you. "kick the developers in the nuts"???? yah sure man. Far be it for me and so many others of the community to voice our displeasure with the current version of battlenet which is what rating systems are for. I WOULD kick whoever is responsible for all of Battle.net 0.2's fails so far.
Then I would rate them a 1.
|
On May 29 2010 23:32 Zato-1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2010 23:01 Archerofaiur wrote:Almost at 2000 Poll: Would you give SC2 a one star amazon rating to protest BNET?Yes (6508) 83% No (1331) 17% 7839 total votes Your vote: Would you give SC2 a one star amazon rating to protest BNET? (Vote): Yes (Vote): No
I can't believe you're going out of your way to kick the developers of this game in the nuts just because one employee made a PR blunder. I just lost a whole lot of respect for you.
It's not just a "PR blunder." They haven't implemented "features" that were a part of the game 12 years ago. If people feel that these features being left out of SC2 warrant the game being a 1, then they should vote it a 1.
|
What irks me is that there has been no clear explanation of the logic, or lack thereof, behind the decision to remove cross realm play. As it stands now, it seems like Blizzard wants us to pay twice for the same product, just to connect to different servers. It just does not make sense, and smells of a money-grubbing decision if you ask me, and I'm just going to assume so unless they clear things up.
Don't exaggerate the no chat channels problem, there will be avenues to chat, but the cross realm play decision is the true problem that will segregate the SC2 communities and it would not be the global game that WC3 used to be.
|
On May 29 2010 23:38 TaKemE wrote: Voteing this game down just because of small stuff missing is going to hurt more in the long run.
No Chat channels No Cross region play No LAN, even after Battle.net validation No Real League system No Clan system Bnet 0.2 in general (no online replays, poor interface design, not being able to freind without emails, privacy concerns, poor custom map system...)
Would it hurt the game more than those things?
|
Newsflash: Blizzard confirms BNet 2.0 is a huge piece of crap. I lol'd
|
after this is clear why there is so much piracy, thanks to gaming companies being so greedy and not trully listening to comunites demands. i hope iccup 2.0 appears and steal all customers of b.net 2.0 and blizzard realize they fuck it up
|
|
|
|