EPTBlizzard: "No plans for chatrooms, crossrealm play" - Page…
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Ho0ps
United Kingdom216 Posts
| ||
|
Dinn
United States66 Posts
On a similar note, what's the point of adding facebook friends if you can't play with them? | ||
|
L6-636536
United States94 Posts
| ||
|
HavoK.
United States172 Posts
| ||
|
freesta
Germany3 Posts
(yeah I could tell them to buy a european client but that would be silly cause they couldnt do low ping games in their own region). | ||
|
disco
Netherlands1667 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 39582
317 Posts
With the whole divide thing, though, Australians have ended up with the south-east Asia region. They've been wondering why you'd choose to do that, as obviously there'll be primarily non-English people playing with them. That's an interesting challenge for us, because we want to make sure that the connectivity to the servers is such that the game experience is not impacted by a high-latency connection, and the latency between Australia and New Zealand to the servers in the US was such that we felt we would be able to deliver a better gaming experience by using their servers in south-east Asia. I don't understand, I'm from Australia and I was placed on the USA server. Can anyone else from Australia confirm this? | ||
|
rK
United States371 Posts
 | ||
Hyde
Australia14568 Posts
On May 30 2010 03:23 QuasiMachina wrote: I don't understand, I'm from Australia and I was placed on the USA server. Can anyone else from Australia confirm this? Yeah I'm in the US server as well. I think they meant after the release of the game they will have a server for the S.E Asia region (and Australians will be locked into that region). | ||
|
LegendaryZ
United States1583 Posts
| ||
|
-orb-
United States5770 Posts
I've been consistently bashing Blizzard during my streams of my own games during the beta and sometimes I felt bad because overall they were making a pretty good game, but holy shit does it seem warranted now. | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
| ||
|
sage_francis
France1823 Posts
| ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On May 30 2010 04:36 sage_francis wrote: Very very sad read. This should be called Battle Net 0.5 ^^ Id go even lower, say BNET 0.2 | ||
|
7th-Real
Australia93 Posts
This is fairly depressing, I don't really see a reason for me to buy sc2 until there is either a hacked server emulator or blizzard re-thinks pretty much every design philosophy they have brought to bnet 2.0. I actually quite like sc2 as a game, but I'm not the kind of person that can simply sit and massgame, which seems to be all bnet 2 is good for. If I didn't already know people through playing BW years ago and chatwhoring on IRC I'd have a total of zero people to practice against (I'm sure many people here are in the same situation, I'm the best person I know at BW, yet I'm still like D+ on ICCUP - playing with IRL friends is a waste of time), what kind of horribly stunted environment for new players is that? Yes the public channels are often full of garbage, but they're also often not. I met some awesome people through BW and War3 and in SC2 I just cant see that ever happening. So now I can't play with American/International friends because blizzard has decided to put Australians on a server with a collection of asian nations with internet almost as bad as our own. In its current state I dont feel like buying the game once letalone 3 times. I have owned SC since release and never once played the single player without cheating through to see the story, I dont intend to play sc2 singleplayer at all. Bnet 2 is such a lonely and boring place. | ||
|
terranghost
United States980 Posts
I'm not going to cast a vote one way or the other. I've played sc1 and I have the sc2 beta (preordered at gamestop so I have no choice now I have the game so whether or not I like bnet 2.0 or not I have already bought the game) When I compare sc1 bnet 1.0 with sc2's bnet 2.0 there are obviously some features that each prevail in. Sc1 did not have a match making system however sc2 does. I have heard that warcraft 3 used a match making system on bnet 1.0 but I don't know for sure. Nevertheless their are advantages to both. If they were to combine the 2 into one that would be the optimum solution I think but reverting back to bnet 1.0 I definately don't think is a viable solution. | ||
|
Trok67
France384 Posts
| ||
|
AppleTart
United States1261 Posts
| ||
|
mgl0x9
United States256 Posts
| ||
|
Mastermind
Canada7096 Posts
On May 30 2010 05:19 Trok67 wrote: the only fact that you're able to compare battle 2.0 with old which is moare than 10 years old show how bad they are. ya, no kidding. bnet2.0 should be so good that it isnt even comparable to some ancient platform such as bnet1.0 | ||
| ||
