EPTThey always said the chat channels wont make it into the release, but that they would be included eventually. The only thing that has changed now is the rhetoric.
NOTHING has changed ...
Confirmed chat channels - Page 8
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
They always said the chat channels wont make it into the release, but that they would be included eventually. The only thing that has changed now is the rhetoric. NOTHING has changed ... | ||
|
nam nam
Sweden4672 Posts
On June 18 2010 01:51 kajeus wrote: Yeah, I think they should just make it so you can see the identifier on their profile. Then you just have to know what a famous player's identifier is, and everything is great. That is basically what they said they are doing. | ||
|
Thrasymachus725
Canada527 Posts
I hate seeing names like x172d816cAAaaaA SEXYBEAST12281 wwWWWWWwwWWWWWWwwwWWWWWW oO0o0oO000OOO000OOOoo Names like this are the reason Identifiers exist in the first place. Since we are only allowed one character per account (this is a very good thing IMO), people are going to want the name they want. Identifiers allow it to be unique, in the way that when someone whispers you, you can check their identifier, or that people cannot impersonate those on your friends list. Group chat channels like this have been confirmed since even before beta was out. It was compared to a system like Steam that has literally hundreds or thousands of channels dedicated to specific interest that are always open. The screaming demand for chat channels confused me, because I knew this was coming. I thought you guys were demanding a huge universal chat channel like USWest-1 or something like that... You know, those ones filled with spam and chat bots... But I guess when you scream and yell so much, you lose all rationality and features that are already confirmed. Delaying the game to get these out for release is asinine, and pulling the "when it's ready card" is not right. SC2 is ready. Battle.net2.0 is a work in progress and will never be "finished". They will be adding features to it 10 years from now. So let's see... Tournament LAN: Confirmed Chat Channels: Confirmed Cross Realm Play: Confirmed All of these features are being implimented in the forms they are needed most. And even now, people are still screaming hate at Blizzard. Some people will never be happy. They live to whine, to scream and to shit on peoples' parade. | ||
|
nam nam
Sweden4672 Posts
On June 18 2010 02:02 Rabiator wrote: I dont know why people are happy about this confirmation that chat channels will be there for us some time after the release. That is not a very precise statement and "after the release" could even be after the second expansion ... They always said the chat channels wont make it into the release, but that they would be included eventually. The only thing that has changed now is the rhetoric. NOTHING has changed ... There will definitely be "chat channels" coming in one of the patches after the release. The system will be based around groups, where you will be able to join public channels that are based around your interests, which can be virtually anything. Also the system will include private chat channels (in plans for release in the first few months after the release), where you will be able to meet with your friends. | ||
|
faseman
Australia215 Posts
I just don't see what's good about this system. You can name yourself John along with 15000 others? Really? Or there would be 1000 KtFlash.xxxx names? | ||
|
sword_siege
United States624 Posts
Here you go Kajeus http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=23767157319&sid=3000&pageNo=1#1 It's been known for over three months that there would be chat channels. Blizzard reiterated their commitment today with a few additional details and now people are claiming "victory", slapping each other on the back and saying, "Good fight brother. We fought the good fight! We showed Blizzard!" The ability for the masses to be led astray is astounding, granted one Blizzard executive made a public relations (PR) blunder this is hardly the "victory" the community is claiming. | ||
|
vesicular
United States1311 Posts
On June 18 2010 01:49 Takkara wrote:Why not just let us choose the identifier again if they're going to hide it anyways. To be fair, one of the issues people seemed to be having was not understanding what the identifier was for when you make an account. I think they're trying to make it so people are not confused as to what an identifier is ("so I need two user names, what?") and instead they just tack on a number behind the scenes. I suspect this is why we can't select our own. | ||
|
ROOTCatZ
Peru1238 Posts
edit: to all the people who are thinking and saying "i knew chat channels were coming"... we all did to some extend until pierce said otherwise. if you honestly think this was in their plans you're just naive and silly, chat channels are a reaction to the community's demands, not a plan that blizzard always had and planned to implement after the game's release... they've only had yeaaaaaaaars to work on this game... don't be so silly boys. | ||
|
Thrasymachus725
Canada527 Posts
On June 18 2010 02:05 faseman wrote: I see another wave of ESPORTS coming! I just don't see what's good about this system. You can name yourself John along with 15000 others? Really? Or there would be 1000 KtFlash.xxxx names? There is only going to be one IdrA.123. There could be an IdrA.487 and an IdrA.187, but only one IdrA.123. Hey look, suddenly he is unique again! You get matched against IdrA. You clobber him all over the place. Check his profile at the end. Find out his identifier is IdrA.344. BOOM you know he was not the real IdrA. While there were a thousand Esports on Battle.net, there was no way to tell the difference between them, even when looking at their profile. This solves a big problem. | ||
|
kasumimi
Greece460 Posts
| ||
|
Thrasymachus725
Canada527 Posts
On June 18 2010 02:11 iG.CatZ wrote: mass 007 incoming, how retarded are these people...(blizzard) Automatically Generated number. I guess elementary school didn't teach you basic reading comprehension eh? Some good advice for everyone on the internet: Before you post a shot at someone's intelligence... make sure that it can't backfire on your own. | ||
|
Thrasymachus725
Canada527 Posts
 | ||
|
Disastorm
United States922 Posts
| ||
|
ig0tfish
United States345 Posts
 | ||
|
Shiladie
Canada1631 Posts
The list currently: Chat channels now in Unique names + easy to use/visible identifier Ability to play internationally without buying multiple copies of the game I am also of the belief that the pro level league will fix the problem people are seeing with wanting to rank people against eachother instead of vs just those in their division. Also I think the skill difference problem of diamond will also be resolved with the addition of proleague (the skill-gap between mid diamond and top diamond is extremely vast) I really hope with the unique identifiers that it forces you to start at 000, and then increments automatically for each person with the same name untill it hits 999, at which point that name is unavailable. This will mean you can almost gaurantee that IDs for non-stupid names won't go outside of the 000-010 range. | ||
|
wishbones
Canada2600 Posts
| ||
|
Graven
United States314 Posts
On June 18 2010 02:05 faseman wrote: I see another wave of ESPORTS coming! I just don't see what's good about this system. You can name yourself John along with 15000 others? Really? Or there would be 1000 KtFlash.xxxx names? Yeah, I honeslty don't think this matters at all, haha. Either way people will abuse the system with nonsense. I think the system they're doing works fine if it could somehow protect the celebs. It's pretty silly if every other game I'm going against "Idra." | ||
|
holy_war
United States3590 Posts
On June 18 2010 02:21 ig0tfish wrote: My unique code will be 143 I'll bet you $5 that it won't be | ||
|
Thrasymachus725
Canada527 Posts
On June 18 2010 02:11 iG.CatZ wrote: edit: to all the people who are thinking and saying "i knew chat channels were coming"... we all did to some extend until pierce said otherwise. if you honestly think this was in their plans you're just naive and silly, chat channels are a reaction to the community's demands, not a plan that blizzard always had and planned to implement after the game's release... they've only had yeaaaaaaaars to work on this game... don't be so silly boys. No, this is really a case of selective listening. Everyone CHOSE to listen to Frank Peirce rather than to EVERYONE ELSE. These have been confirmed for a LONG time. Frank Peirce was likely talking about the public universal chat channels like USWest-1 that had no rhyme or reason behind them and were filled with Spam and Chatbots. Do you really want those? I know I don't... Yes Frank should have thought twice before speaking, but really everyone just ate up every word he said and chose to ignore what everyone else said. Now that they are reiterating what they said before, everyone thinks Blizzard changed their mind after the waves of complaints... No. That was not the case... Frank was right. There will not be public, universal chat channels. Blizz confirmed that there will be group chat and interest based channels. | ||
|
nihlon
Sweden5581 Posts
On June 18 2010 02:26 Zanez.smarty wrote: No, this is really a case of selective listening. Everyone CHOSE to listen to Frank Peirce rather than to EVERYONE ELSE. These have been confirmed for a LONG time. Frank Peirce was likely talking about the public universal chat channels like USWest-1 that had no rhyme or reason behind them and were filled with Spam and Chatbots. Do you really want those? I know I don't... Yes Frank should have thought twice before speaking, but really everyone just ate up every word he said and chose to ignore what everyone else said. Now that they are reiterating what they said before, everyone thinks Blizzard changed their mind after the waves of complaints... No. That was not the case... Frank was right. There will not be public, universal chat channels. Blizz confirmed that there will be group chat and interest based channels. Agreed. When I read his interview, I did feel it conflicted with what I had read previously. I do feel though, if it was just a no-name pr person, people wouldn't have put as much truth to it. Don't really understand why they sent him out to answer questions when he clearly didn't have a real understanding of the issues (as I see it anyway). | ||
| ||
