| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On June 01 2010 02:35 Half wrote: Wait what your 57? O.o. I thought you were a med school student. lol this reminds me of the time I convinced everyone that FrozenArbiter was a old man :p No for the record im not really 57. | ||
|
Rorschach
United States623 Posts
Poll: Are you buying Starcraft 2? Waiting to see if Blizz will address the issues first (178) Going to go thorugh with the order despite bnet 2.0 (78) Due to the lack of bnet features I have/will cancel my pre-order (65) I won't purchase any of the expansions unless they get their act together (50) 371 total votes Your vote: Are you buying Starcraft 2? (Vote): Due to the lack of bnet features I have/will cancel my pre-order | ||
|
stacker
United States32 Posts
nice | ||
|
zero hoki
United States3 Posts
Thats part of battle.net! Who cares about spam! This is a terrible idea blizzard WHAT ARE YOU DOING?? Put chatrooms in bnet 2.0 come on, WTF blizz! What newfag blizz producer thought this would be a good idea? EXECUTE HIM BY FIRING SQAUD! | ||
|
positronix
United States39 Posts
Granted this is still the beta so its obviously unfinished but they really need to explicitly state what features they are going to add to the final version if they don't want people to nerdrage. and imo a management decision to bring in an xbox live developer to make bnet 2.0 totally explains everything going on right now. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7291 Posts
Thats why everyone is so pissed for the assholes who wonder why also no cross region play unless you have multiple cd keys in an RTS is obviously fucking dumb and thats another reason why people are raging. Even if they have reasoning behind their decision its unacceptable. | ||
|
Magmar
Austria2 Posts
On May 31 2010 13:11 fuzzehbunneh wrote: yet another instance of our culture's everybody is a winner attitude creeping into competition and ruining it for everyone. Consider this: You are not a korean Programer. Korean Progamer could say everybody who is not on our level and earning money with this Game is per definition a stupid loser. How would you feel? And don´t claim that you would shrug this off. Not when you hold up the flag of competition and winner gets it all. blizzard keeps trying to cater to casual gamers, and honestly this turns off the hardcore gamers when the casual gamers COULDNT CARE LESS about any of it as they are by definition CASUAL Blizzard knows there are only a few dozen thousands of "hardcore gamers" that look like Count Dracula because they don´t see the sun very often. It would be stupid to cater to these male virgins. Better to make games that appeal to millions of people. It´s not only better for them. Computergames became relevant when companies started to make content for people who knew Sex and Sunlight. The 99,9% of the overall male and female population. Thats the horrible thing about this: WE ALLOW ONLY THE GAME FANATICS TO COMPLAIN ABOUOT B NET 2.0. And thats stupid! The casual gamers have to step up forward too or you and your kind will ruin it for everyone. User was banned for this post. | ||
|
clusen
Germany8702 Posts
On June 01 2010 02:57 positronix wrote: I'm absolutely floored that blizzard is surprised there is outrage on this subject. There really must be not a single person left from the previous games working there, its hard to fathom how they didn't see this kind of response coming. Reading through the blue response I summarized it in my mind as "dont get mad at us or we wont listen to you, just post and maybe we will do something about it or maybe not". There are not that many people left from the good old Blizz, many good designer(especially from Diablo) did not want to become moneywhores and did not want to make wow, so they got fired. They are working at arenanet etc now. Guild Wars is one of their works, gameplay wise by far the best mmorpg out there. A mmorpg which really takes skill! So yes, there are many new people working on wow/sc2/d3 and whatever will come. Just inform yourself about d3 and the infos Bashiok leaked, it has NOTHING to do with d2 or diablo in general anymore. It can not, because all the great people behind diablo are working somewhere else. D3 is more wow than Diablo. | ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
Blizzard knows there are only a few dozen thousands of "hardcore gamers" that look like Count Dracula because they don´t see the sun very often. It would be stupid to cater to these male virgins. Better to make games that appeal to millions of people. It´s not only better for them. Computergames became relevant when companies started to make content for people who knew Sex and Sunlight. The 99,9% of the overall male and female population. Thats the horrible thing about this: WE ALLOW ONLY THE GAME FANATICS TO COMPLAIN ABOUOT B NET 2.0. And thats stupid! The casual gamers have to step up forward too or you and your kind will ruin it for everyone. Fact: Approx 1/4 of SC2's target audience cares about E-sports. Starcraft is expected to sell four million to six million copies according to analysts in this year. The HDH invitational thread has attracted over 1 million viewers. Therefor, 1/5 of Starcrafts audience is directly benefiting from changes that facilitate the growth of Esports, including cross region support and chat channels, something you think only "hardcore gamers" that look like Count Dracula because they don´t see the sun very often" care about. http://www.industrygamers.com/news/starcraft-ii-sales-could-reach-5-million-in-first-year-says-analyst/ http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/singularity/news.html?sid=6250260 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/index.php?show_part=36 HDH invitational: view-1,367,897 There are not that many people left from the good old Blizz, many good designer(especially from Diablo) did not want to become moneywhores and did not want to make wow, so they got fired. They are working at arenanet etc now. Guild Wars is one of their works, gameplay wise by far the best mmorpg out there. A mmorpg which really takes skill! All but two of known SC2 designers and producers in lead roles are veterans. People left blizzard north because they didn't want to move across half the fucking country when the studio was shut down because they were not preforming to blizzards quality standards. Their last game, Diablo 2, is objectively the worst rated blizzard game ever produced, experienced numerous delays, and was released unfinished and years outdated. It provided little changes over the previous game, the most major which received negative attention from fans (strict class system). Features like the infamous "chat gem" were originally sleighted to be a full fledged Auction house, but were cut due to the deadline. In lieu of these problems, the limited online community at the time accused blizzard north of selling out and releasing an unfinished product. l2perspective. | ||
|
zrules
United States88 Posts
On June 01 2010 00:38 CROrens wrote: this just goes to show how we can bitch all we want - it wont change a thing... times have changed and community just doesnt matter anymore, like someone said before, ppl are gona buy SC2 no matter what, i know i would, and blizz knows that so they can do whatever they want If you dont believe me, MW2 without dedicated servers says it all Well last I checked a company cares about money... hurting their wallets is the only way to potentially make them reconsider. While some people think it's "immature" to take away from a company's profits, it's what unions do to get recognized by walking out, and what consumers do to address civil or general rights concerns. Doing the same to a game such as this is, well, a possible force. | ||
|
Takkara
United States2503 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Oh Clan-Iraq... you say things that are so Clan-Iraq. This should probably be in the SC2 forums, but... eh... here ya go! Me shouting down your hyperbole once again.  Q u o t e: 1) No LAN Support Correct. Q u o t e: 2) No chat rooms There will be chat rooms, they're just not making launch. Probably. [ed] So Frank was out for interviews in EU it seems (?) and said something to the effect of "no chat rooms" but there would be chat for guilds and groups. Which is more or less what was said before. That it would be more about getting people into focused discussions instead of just having free for all chat systems. In any case, I don't know a lot about it. Personally, chat rooms are soooooo 2002. Q u o t e: 3) Paid DLC It seems that maps and "expansion packs that are really part of the base game" are bumping the total price of SC2 to over $100 quite easily. I have no plans to buy the game, but I find that a little alarming. I hate to imagine how much D3 will cost in total- combined with the next factor: Alarming! How much was Lord of Destruction? Expansion packs are sold for skrilla. If, however, you want to argue that StarCraft 2: Wings of Liberty is not a full sized and full-featured stand-alone release then... well you're not going to buy it anyway so ... Q u o t e: 4) Pay-to-play It has turned out that SC2 is indeed Pay-to-Play, despite all the promises we've had otherwise, in regions outside of the US. For example, Russian and South American players must subscribe to battle.net and get a set amount of "game hours" that expire and need to be renewed. Will such a system exist for D3? We tailor our business models for each country/region based on many factors. Here in the US I can walk into a game store, buy a boxed product for about $60, take it home, and I generally expect that to include free multiplayer (unless I know it's a subscription MMO or whatever). That's not something you can do in all other countries, most don't have game stores, and so it's not something they generally work with. The exact same tailoring has been used for World of Warcraft. Q u o t e: 5) Region Locking Here's the last thing that was said on region locking (this was Sigaty btw): Q: How far in the 'long term' are those plans which allow for swapping to U.S. servers on an E.U. account - or a global account? A: Jumping to the region you want is definitely in the long term plan for Battle.net, although we do have some concerns about communicating properly to the player what's happening if they choose this because it WILL affect the latency of the game. As far as a date on when, I don't have one yet. There are a number of features that we want to make sure get out their first and jumping to different servers is lower on the priority list at the moment. Q u o t e: 6) Statistical Balance Design The developers for SC2 have been strictly using a statistical approach to balancing their game, ignoring player feedback and instead using only data harvested from the beta gameplay to balance their units. Hahaha. You're hilarious. We all play. All the designers and developers play. Some on semi-pro levels. We're in contact with many pro players, our friends and family that are playing, we read the forums, we read fansites, etc. etc. What I see as the main issue here is that a lot of the time people want balance changes based on flavor of the minute strategies without understanding that it's constantly evolving. So much so that from day to day the matchups could change dramatically. Not seeing the balance changes you think should be made implemented is not the same as us ignoring the community and making arbitrary changes based on nothing but statistics. They're definitely a tool, but by no means are the sole or even biggest factor for balance changes. 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. Q u o t e: and SC2 requires questionable privacy details with an unsafe EULA- being able to share details like your Facebook account, and not allowing you to 'friend' users unless you're willing to show them your "Real Name" and Facebook, etc. I hate to imagine this spilling over to D3 Everything stated here is vaguely incorrect to flat out wrong. You can add people to your friends list without being a RealID friend with them. The choice to ask for friend invites with Facebook friends is your choice. I don't even know what 'questionable privacy details with an unsafe EULA' is supposed to mean, but it SOUNDS like I should be pretty scared now. Q u o t e: 8) Complete Lack of Innovation Well that's just, like, your opinion, man. Seriously though, game play first. We're not going to try all sorts of crazy things just to try to be different. Our interest is in putting out a fun game, not one that exists to try out unproven mechanics, or push graphics/computing boundaries. This has been a fairly regular trait amongst Blizzard games. Q u o t e: 9) The switch to voice chat is horrendous. It leaves nothing to the imagination and makes you hate the people your playing with because of their ridiculous voices/accents (they all sound the same) and the breathing noises. Voice chat is horrible. I haven't played bnet voichat but every other voicechat i've ever played, counterstrike, xbx, ps3 is horrendous. ??? You can chat in-game through text, same as always. If you want though: Menu -> Options -> Voice -> Uncheck "Enable Voice Chat" Then there's no chance you'll ever hear anyone. But it's a great tool for quick communication between teammates if you have a regular two's partner. Or whatever. | ||
|
zeuS~
United States193 Posts
On June 01 2010 03:03 Magmar wrote: Consider this: You are not a korean Programer. Korean Progamer could say everybody who is not on our level and earning money with this Game is per definition a stupid loser. How would you feel? And don´t claim that you would shrug this off. Not when you hold up the flag of competition and winner gets it all. Blizzard knows there are only a few dozen thousands of "hardcore gamers" that look like Count Dracula because they don´t see the sun very often. It would be stupid to cater to these male virgins. Better to make games that appeal to millions of people. It´s not only better for them. Computergames became relevant when companies started to make content for people who knew Sex and Sunlight. The 99,9% of the overall male and female population. Thats the horrible thing about this: WE ALLOW ONLY THE GAME FANATICS TO COMPLAIN ABOUOT B NET 2.0. And thats stupid! The casual gamers have to step up forward too or you and your kind will ruin it for everyone. How do any of the changes wanted/needed negatively affect casual gamers? This only hurts everyone. | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
Casual gamers love logging on and sitting in a cold blank interface with no visible human element. | ||
|
Longshank
1648 Posts
On June 01 2010 01:51 Archerofaiur wrote:+ Show Spoiler + Blues respond. Possibly the biggest Blue response I have every seen on any topic...ever. And I would know. From german forum (google translate) To my knowledge, our thoughts are behind all that we do not want any unguided chat rooms, the sink quickly into chaos. There should be chat features for focused discussions, but advanced functionality to it will most likely not until the start creating the game. ... We currently can not go into more detail and give definitive answers to specific questions such as these. Everything else would degenerate into more speculation on my side, what really helps you not continue. I can assure you, however, that it is not our intention to take you to the fun on Battle.net by limiting social interaction. We want you can always be with the community and your friends in contact. This should, however, be regulated through lanes and putting all the players together in a chat room is not my opinion, this vision needs. From english (EU) forum I have been watching these threads quite a bit over the week-end and I have to agree more with some of the replies than with the OP of this thread. Rage is not good. Rage makes the forums look like a spam-fest and rage makes us want to ignore players or even ban them, because their tone just gets out of hand. Rage makes players create 50 different threads on the same subject, whereas we prefer to have feedback bundled in one place. What we do want to see and keep seeing from you is your feedback. We want to know if you do not agree with something, this never changes. What we do not want is players raging and just making unfounded accusations and crying doomsday because at the moment there is something missing that they feel is vital. Please do take a step back before raging - is this something that can be fixed? Do you still enjoy the game itself? Please give your feedback and give us the benefit of the doubt that we do want your game experience to be fun. Please always continue to give us your feedback, when you feel that there is something that you just can not live without. Please always continue to do so without rage and in a civil manner.  ... Not on topic though.  If there is a hot topic on something, we definitely want players to post and to discuss it. For sure, if there is a thread about a topic that reaches thousands of views and posts it catches our attention faster. This is in fact a signal, that a lot of players are concerned about this topic - it catches the attention and it is very likely to be passed on in our feedback reports. What I wanted to bring up though was, that while having a lot of players have a very strong opinion about something is a good thing, it is a very bad thing if they are not able to communicate this in a constructive manner. Yes, post about things you don't like but help us change them and tell us why you don't like it or how you would like it. This does not mean that everything can be implemented exactly the way you wish for and it does not mean that we will definitely be able to implement it for launch or even shortly after launch - but a lot of players giving us their point of view on a subject gives us the possibility of bringing this up in an informed manner and also giving us the possibility of taking some good quotes out of these threads. If we have 50 threads on the same topic, 80% of these are just one-liners saying that this is so terrible and we are a bad company (btw.. 77,2% of statistics are made up on the spot - thanks for the laugh Carighan), then it is hard to find the constructive ones that actually give us the information that we need and just makes us waste a lot of our time for moderation of forums that we could have used a lot better in compiling the feedback. Just one thing I want to keep pointing out, it has been said before and I always keep saying it - we are on your side. We want to make a game we enjoy and you enjoy. There are timelines that need to be kept, there might be priorities that you don't understand, but in the end, if there is something that is important to you be sure that we will be passing it on. If you rage - you will lose your voice on these forums and you will be one less person fighting for what you want, if you post in a mannered way, we get a lot more out of you as a beta tester. /end wall of text! .... Remember, Battle.net 2.0 is work in progress. What a lot of players don't read in the rage is the part where Frank Pearce is talking about Clan chat and Groups chat. That is definitely being worked on. If you check back to our last Twitter dev chat, there was the same question (http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=23767157319&sid=3000): "We do have plans for chat channels. Specifically, we want to organize chat channels around users' interests so you know what types of conversations you are going to get into when you join a channel. This feature is not something that will be in for beta. Currently we plan to do this feature in a patch after the game launches. " ... Hehe.. we do ask for your opinion. That is what this forum is for, that is what the beta test if for and we have pulled quite a few things out of these forums. Sometimes getting involved in discussions does change the course of the discussion though. Just now we just wanted to jump in, because it just turned too emotional and this usually leads to a lot of flaming and insulting which is something we don't want to see on the forums. ... You mean the thread where you were just talking about how you won't use it but it doesn't hurt you either and you're just mad because of the priorities? That feedback was passed on, but just please note that the Facebook integration in its current form, is a lot simpler to implement than most of you would believe. .... By the way, something that might have come off wrong when explaining this. We don't want/need a wall of text from every single player. If you just want to show your support, than posting just a small confirmation that this is what you feel as well is totally valid. But please make sure that this is not posted in an insulting manner. ... To be honest, the kittens distracted me tons while watching that video. ^^ Source http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25170778216&pageNo=1&sid=5010#4 Why don't you add the blue response to the OP? Or does it not coincide with your agenda? | ||
|
Tripal
Finland92 Posts
| ||
|
Rorschach
United States623 Posts
Why don't you add the blue response to the OP? Or does it not coincide with your agenda?[/QUOTE] Becasue it was stated "too my knowledge". Just cause its a blue doesn't make it fact. Until I hear an official announcement/interview from Blizz that says otherwise or see the things we are asking for implemented this "shitstorm" will continue.... | ||
|
InRaged
1047 Posts
On June 01 2010 03:46 Longshank wrote: Why don't you add the blue response to the OP? Or does it not coincide with your agenda? There's like zero new info except acknowledgment by Xordiah that she had read feedback and request to not rage at b.net forums | ||
|
Yazilliclick
13 Posts
On June 01 2010 03:41 Archerofaiur wrote: Casual gamers love logging on and sitting in a cold blank interface with no visible human element. I'd consider myself casual or close to it. I'm certainly not going to be playing for the ladder or trying to be competitive. My biggest problem with this is no the custom games system and no names for them. It's already a pain and it's going to get even worse after beta. Not only can you not have a name to let people know the options for a game but you can no longer use a name to give an indication of the skill of the people in the game. Beyond that there's the problem that the list of maps is by popularity and map name and not a list of games being created and refreshed so unless a map is popular already, the chances of it ever getting so or getting enough players is going to be slim considering the amount of digging that players will need to use to find them. Channels would certainly be nice but aren't as big for me. Didn't use them for SC. I did however rely on them for D2 so hopefully they get around to it for D3. I can certainly see how people who are more involved organizing things for SC2 would desperately want them though. I don't think they're going to solve all the problems that you claim though. | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On June 01 2010 03:46 Longshank wrote: Why don't you add the blue response to the OP? Or does it not coincide with your agenda? I am more than happy to put things in the OP that dont coincide with my agenda. Im the one who brought that new blue quote over to TL in the first place lol. But first you have to tell me: Does it really say anything new? Ive read it several times and I can sum it up for you "We hear you and your feedback is important to us. We just arnt going to do anything about it. We have a deadline." Real Blizzardy... | ||
|
Darkstar-
8 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
RSL Revival
Solar vs Zoun
MaxPax vs Bunny
Kung Fu Cup
WardiTV Korean Royale
PiGosaur Monday
RSL Revival
Classic vs Creator
Cure vs TriGGeR
Kung Fu Cup
CranKy Ducklings
RSL Revival
herO vs Gerald
ByuN vs SHIN
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
