EPTB.net 2.0 is a step back in every meangingful way from b.net 1.0 circa wc3.
Cross Realm Conundrum - Page 33
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
789
United States959 Posts
B.net 2.0 is a step back in every meangingful way from b.net 1.0 circa wc3. | ||
|
fevax
Turkey143 Posts
| ||
|
distant_voice
Germany2521 Posts
| ||
|
cloudJR
United States266 Posts
| ||
|
Uriel_SVK
Slovakia427 Posts
Even if no more stuff that community demands from Battle.net 2.0 will be implemented, Cross-Region has to!!! | ||
|
speedphlux
Bulgaria962 Posts
| ||
|
shlomo
258 Posts
You'd think designing a video game which is popular enough to be played competitively 11 years later is something to be proud of, but instead they are pissing on it as hard as they can to make room for they new, inferior product (but with updated graphics). I don't really get the people who are still "believing" in Blizzard at this point. | ||
Chill
Calgary25991 Posts
| ||
|
SixSongs
Poland1455 Posts
| ||
|
Takkara
United States2503 Posts
On June 01 2010 23:37 shlomo wrote: Yup. All about money and control. Blizzard obviously doesn't want ESPORTS. They don't want sports to begin with. You can't charge people that organize soccer tournaments. You can't "update" soccer and ask for $50 extra per player. You can't nickel and dime at every possible corner, leaving little to no independence at all in the hands of players/organizers and expect a sport to get big. "Sports" are a terrible concept from a developer's wallet's perspective. I think at this point and given the design choices that have been plainly explained to us, if you still believe Blizzard gives a ____ about ESPORTS, you're kidding yourself. You're just so wrong. It has NOTHING to do about money and trying to make people buy more copies of the game. It's just not like that. There's a reason that people also need to make extra Battle.net accounts for their extra copies of the game: the tech doesn't allow people to have multiple regions attached to the same account. It's not about the client you use to access the game, it's about the account you use to access the client you want to use. They let you download any client you want for free, but you need to have an account flagged for that region. They don't have any tech at this moment to flag accounts for multiple regions. It doesn't work that way. This is the same architecture that WoW runs on. SC2 isn't WoW, but they're now built on the same framework in terms of regions and features of BNet. Blizzard completely erroneously assumed that like WoW, people wouldn't need to play cross-region outside of some tournament situations if they made BNet full of enough players. They're right for the vast vast vast vast vast majority of players, but of course wrong for near every single high-level player. This is an example of Blizzard just being a bit blind to the needs of the high-level competitive players as opposed to them making an abusive money grab. Honestly, if people would dial back the zealous, blind rage and just stopped to think about what's going on here, you can see where the lines are drawn. This is not a war. This is not an evil empire trying to fuck a community for more money. It really. honestly. 100%. is. not. If you're at the point of "torching Blizz HQ" like the poster a couple of people up, then you're just way beyond contributing rationally to this conversation. | ||
|
Tanatos
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
QuixoticO
Netherlands810 Posts
"Where did they lose the technology that existed in 1998? And how does me paying for another copy of the game make the technology exist again? I am confused." But in all seriousness I doubt it's that hard for them to flag accounts on multiple regions, hell they shouldn't even have too and just remove that part of the system check before logging in. | ||
|
shlomo
258 Posts
On June 01 2010 23:52 Takkara wrote: This is an example of Blizzard just being a bit blind to the needs of the high-level competitive players as opposed to them making an abusive money grab. Honestly, if people would dial back the zealous, blind rage and just stopped to think about what's going on here, you can see where the lines are drawn. This is not a war. This is not an evil empire trying to fuck a community for more money. It really. honestly. 100%. is. not. Lol. Yeah they're just stupid and "a bit blind". They just have no clue what is going on. I don't believe they are that idiotic, my friend. We will see if "it's not a war" when they start rolling out the microtransactions for clans/tournaments/xrealm (oops that last one isn't a microtransaction, it's $60). I'm pretty sure we have it coming. I mean just listen to Frank Pearce once again ffs. The guy is half resigned, half depressed, but he is telling it like it is: you're gonna have to pay up, bitches. | ||
|
shlomo
258 Posts
On June 01 2010 23:52 Takkara wrote: Blizzard completely erroneously assumed that like WoW, people wouldn't need to play cross-region outside of some tournament situations I'm going to quote this because it's too funny. "like WoW" Yeah, because Blizzard has a long history of not designing RTS games, right? And it makes total sense to look at WoW when you're designing a RTS game. It's not like between SC and SC2 they had War3/TFT, and it's not like War3 had a pretty damn good Bnet with AMM clan support xrealm and omg chatrooms. I mean the level of retardedness you assume from those designers is just amazing. I'd rather call them money whores, at least I'm not insulting their intelligence. | ||
|
zul
Germany5427 Posts
 or play funstrats vs. americans :pchatrooms should not even be discussed - give 'em (back) and thanks! | ||
|
Takkara
United States2503 Posts
On June 01 2010 23:55 Nyxs wrote:I doubt it's that hard for them to flag accounts on multiple regions, hell they shouldn't even have too and just remove that part of the system check before logging in. If it wasn't hard, they'd already have done it. Stop assuming ulterior sinister motives. Sometimes, the simples, most benign explanation is the correct one. It's a company made of real people. Gamers, even. Why is it so hard to believe that if they could make a trivial decision to make the lives of gamers better, they would make it? It is not a trivial decision or a trivial fix or a trivial action. BNet 2.0 is so different from the BNet of SC that the only thing it shares with it is the name. Again, I'm 100% in support of this thread. But I'm just hoping, completely naively, that some form of rationality will return to the community lynch mob. Then we can make reasoned, impassioned pleas that are backed by clear logic and that integrates with Blizzard's reality and gives us what we want more easily. Talking about firing or killing Activision execs or fire-bombing Blizzard is just detracting from our credibility. | ||
|
shlomo
258 Posts
On June 02 2010 00:40 Takkara wrote: Talking about firing or killing Activision execs or fire-bombing Blizzard is just detracting from our credibility. I'd say asking a RTS community if they "really want chatrooms" or stating they have to pay an additional 60$ per region they want to play on outside their own is hurting Blizzard's credibility quite a bit also. | ||
|
bITt.mAN
Switzerland3693 Posts
/signed for my brother | ||
|
Tinithor
United States1552 Posts
On June 02 2010 00:40 Takkara wrote: If it wasn't hard, they'd already have done it. Stop assuming ulterior sinister motives. Sometimes, the simples, most benign explanation is the correct one. It's a company made of real people. Gamers, even. Why is it so hard to believe that if they could make a trivial decision to make the lives of gamers better, they would make it? It is not a trivial decision or a trivial fix or a trivial action. BNet 2.0 is so different from the BNet of SC that the only thing it shares with it is the name. Again, I'm 100% in support of this thread. But I'm just hoping, completely naively, that some form of rationality will return to the community lynch mob. Then we can make reasoned, impassioned pleas that are backed by clear logic and that integrates with Blizzard's reality and gives us what we want more easily. Talking about firing or killing Activision execs or fire-bombing Blizzard is just detracting from our credibility. There is absolutely 0 reason for not allowing Xrealm play besides wanting more money. Just no excuse for it at all. Blizzard is a gigantic company and you don't think that they can allow Xrealm in a game 12 years after a game that they already did it in? No , you are blind if you think that they aren't letting us do that because they can't. They aren't letting us because they do not want to | ||
|
NukeTheStars
United States277 Posts
On June 02 2010 00:09 shlomo wrote: I'd rather call them money whores, at least I'm not insulting their intelligence. When a Blizzard solution to being able to play the game with my friend overseas is "Ummm..... buy the game again?!" I think you have every right to call them money whores and insult their intelligence. | ||
| ||
