|
I saw this post and thought the topic might merit its own thread.
Nachtjäger, Suramar, 59 Night Elf Death Knight post 35821 in epic thread wroteGot in touch with my ex-flatmate, whose sister works as a GM for Blizzard, to see what the internal buzz on this was. Apparently, at the moment the employees are largely as pissed as the players, and she stated that despite attempts to keep it hushed, it has become known that the big creative players within Blizzard are pretty much as unhappy about this as we are. Everybody has been told they are not free to comment on this situation outside of specially prepared statements. It's still going ahead, however (and here's where in-house rumours and hearsay really start coming into play): from what they've picked up, the Blizzard leads have been told in no uncertain terms that the non-gameplay-related direction of the game is working to a different blueprint now. GC and company are free to play with shiny new talent trees all they like, for example, but for the first time the decisions regarding Battle.net implementation, Real ID, and plans for the general acquisition of new players for the business are no longer in Blizzard's own hands, and that's not going down too well.
Honestly, everything from the Battle.net side of Starcraft II and Activision-Blizzard recently seems to be a huge tremendous fuck you to its player base as it reaches out for new markets to tap. Do you really want chatrooms?
I think Blizzard knows exactly what's going on. Nobody is actually saying things, but dozens of threads are being locked and hundreds of pages of posts have been deleted. I don't know whether it's petition spam or copy pasted stuff Blizzard doesn't want floating around, but obviously there are people hard at work watching the thread.
It's also probably no accident that Blizzard dropped twin bombshell announcements the very day after the forum change was announced - bringing back the North America SC II Beta for the Starcraft fans and releasing a fresh wave of Cataclysm previews for the WoW players, the classic distraction strategy - break a controversial decision right before a major sporting event, hopefully it'll get drowned out.
I don't know if this is their attempt at drawing attention away from the issue, and who knows how well it works, but the issue has spilled far beyond forum doors - virtually every single community with an internet presence, from blizzard fansites like teamliquid to gaming information venues (penny arcade, /v/, kotaku,) random venues (for those of you know what it is even fandom_wank has gotten in to trash the decision) and recently, hit the mainstream media websites - Wall Street Journal, British Broadcasting Corporation, Associated Press, National Broadcasting Corporation, you name it, it's there. More information in other thread, of course
It goes without saying their stated justification - "too many trolls" is 100%, pure, unadulterated bullshit. That isn't even worth debating. So, why? (The "we just want to test out Facebook integration a bit, handle the server load" reason for killing Battle.net friends is also suspect; it's far more likely they wanted to push thousands of beta testers to try it out in order to get anything done, to get people used to the idea of facebook and smashing together the anonymous and real worlds in a tremendous fusion of light, heat, and cash.)
It's probably not a coincidence that it might just be related to facebook and the "monetization" of battle.net (you fucking think?) There's a speculation that it might be related a Korean law that cracks down harshly on internet anonymity, but my guess is they looked at the number of Farmville players out there (eighty fucking million) and decided they were going to force Battle.net 2.0 hell for leather into the world of social media. There doesn't even have to be an explicit campaign involved. If it costs them a hundred thousand Starcraft II orders and cancelled WoW subscriptions, a half of a percent of Farmville users picking up WoW or Starcraft II would make up for that many times over. This comparison is flawed, but roughly the numbers stand.
As Farmville teaches us, the power of facebook user advertising insane - Blizzard realizes that if notifications about lost cats and treasure chests can pull people into farmville by the millions, then notifications about hitting diamond rank one, slaying Baal on super duper ultra hardcore mode, or finishing some fiendishly difficult raid without a single resurrection, might do the same for Blizzard's games. This is an unbelievable shitload of money. I mean, per say, this isn't bad, or evil, it's just Blizzard wanting to use the power of social media to make hundreds of millions of dollars - every single corporation in the world wants to do this.
And if something as small as forum posting isn't invasive, why the rage over this small movement? People can just not use the forums - we have TL, after all. This is worrying because it looks like Activision Blizzard has a general policy of slowly trying to get its foot into the door, bit by bit, getting people used to things here, lowering people's expectations there, until they get where they want, community rage be damned. Oh, sure, you'll always have the ability to play Starcraft II in peace and quiet the same way you can have a facebook with everything turned off - most people just aren't going to fucking bother with the additional trouble.
Of course, maybe this is all trash, they could just be that (do you really want chatrooms) dumb about a "anti-troll and anti-flaming measure." Who fucking knows?
|
Wait, so they won't interfere with Blizzard's game design, just superfluous stuff outside of the game itself?
I'll probably catch some flak, but in that case I don't fucking care.
Edit:Oh, sure, you'll always have the ability to play Starcraft II in peace and quiet the same way you can have a facebook with everything turned off - most people just aren't going to fucking bother with the additional trouble.
I think you overestimate how much of the community as a whole actually cares about stuff like this. The people who post on forums are a tiny minority, and the people who actually go through on the threats of quitting are even smaller. People will put up with a tremendous amount of bullshit. The sales and subs they'll lose from any of this will be negligible, even disregarding sales they stand to gain.
|
Okay, here's things that you might care about:
They're want to monetize Battle.net with respect to Starcraft II (custom maps, god knows what else.)
They show tremendous disregard for the wishes of the community, whether chat channels or this.
It sets precedent for more invasions of privacy (would you like your real name as your BNet handle?)
They seem to think that the consumers, as a general rule, are completely fucking retarded.
|
On July 08 2010 18:31 Psychopomp wrote:Wait, so they won't interfere with Blizzard's game design, just superfluous stuff outside of the game itself? I'll probably catch some flak, but in that case I don't fucking care.Edit: Show nested quote +Oh, sure, you'll always have the ability to play Starcraft II in peace and quiet the same way you can have a facebook with everything turned off - most people just aren't going to fucking bother with the additional trouble. I think you overestimate how much of the community as a whole actually cares about stuff like this. The people who post on forums are a tiny minority, and the people who actually go through on the threats of quitting are even smaller. People will put up with a tremendous amount of bullshit. The sales and subs they'll lose from any of this will be negligible, even disregarding sales they stand to gain.
If we extract from that post the following:
I don't fucking care.
And
I think you overestimate how much of the community as a whole actually cares about stuff like this.
You sum up my viewpoint concerning this matter entirely. I truly and honestly think we live in a generation too quick to anger, point their fingers, and judge.
Just let the matters settle, take some deep breaths, and see what happens. We were already promised chat channels in a patch or two - I for one think that's huge considering it was only the vocal minority speaking out.
|
On July 08 2010 18:37 EmeraldSparks wrote:
Okay, here's things that you might care about:
They're want to monetize Battle.net with respect to Starcraft II (custom maps, god knows what else.)
They show tremendous disregard for the wishes of the community, whether chat channels or this.
It sets precedent for more invasions of privacy (would you like your real name as your BNet handle?)
They seem to think that the consumers, as a general rule, are completely fucking retarded.
Free new maps are nice, not an entitlement. As long as I'm not forced to buy them to play ladder games, and it's not 15$ for TWO NEW MAPS AND THREE OLD ONES, I honestly have no issue with paying for new maps. I pay 15$ for an album, and 10$ for a movie ticket, I think I can scrounge up a buck or two for a good map.
I'll never understand the love for public chatrooms. Whoopee, I get to talk to a legion of retards. The practical use for Starcraft 2 is almost non-existant, and by the time Diablo 3 rolls around we should have them.
While I myself and basically untrackable, and I think the threat of internet psychos is completely overblown, I concede the last point. People, namely women and minorities, will be much easier to harass.
Edit(AGAIN!): For those okay with the whole real name thing, like I was, RPS raises some good points.
|
All i want to see is their stocks go down to hell... so sad that blizzard sold themselves to this fuckers.
|
On July 08 2010 18:37 EmeraldSparks wrote:
They seem to think that the consumers, as a general rule, are completely fucking retarded.
Considering how much hacking they had to put with after all their stupid stunts and their speedial lawsuits/threats to people already developing an alternate Bnet2, I'd say they're scared shitless of 'certain' consumers and just want to address the masses.
|
I feel as if I should point out that we have no clue if that posters isn't full of shit, by the way.
|
On July 08 2010 18:43 Psychopomp wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2010 18:37 EmeraldSparks wrote:
Okay, here's things that you might care about:
They're want to monetize Battle.net with respect to Starcraft II (custom maps, god knows what else.)
They show tremendous disregard for the wishes of the community, whether chat channels or this.
It sets precedent for more invasions of privacy (would you like your real name as your BNet handle?)
They seem to think that the consumers, as a general rule, are completely fucking retarded. Free new maps are nice, not an entitlement. As long as I'm not forced to buy them to play ladder games, and it's not 15$ for TWO NEW MAPS AND THREE OLD ONES, I honestly have no issue with paying for new maps. I pay 15$ for an album, and 10$ for a movie ticket, I think I can scrounge up a buck or two for a good map. I'll never understand the love for public chatrooms. Whoopee, I get to talk to a legion of retards. The practical use for Starcraft 2 is almost non-existant, and by the time Diablo 3 rolls around we should have them. While I myself and basically untrackable, and I think the threat of internet psychos is completely overblown, I concede the last point. People, namely women and minorities, will be much easier to harass. Edit(AGAIN!): For those okay with the whole real name thing, like I was, RPS raises some good points.
Ever made a chatroom to talk with all of your friends in the same place? Its so clunky in bnet 0.2. Chat rooms make everything so much easier.
|
Got in touch with my ex-flatmate, whose sister works as a GM for Blizzard
I'm sure this is a trustworthy, reliable source 
Before people get too upset about this, please think about where it comes from. Or doesn't come from.
|
Well put post there my friend. I think while there is alot of rage going on regarding these highly heated subjects, people should realize that on the flip side - there is the possibility that StarCraft 2 will become the next farmville. And you have to wonder - How incredible that would be?
The question is: Will this new direction for gaming towards social media flop or will it succeed?
I think most people here can agree that most people who own blizzard games will continue to purchase and use blizzard products. Regardless of lack of chat rooms, forced RealID, etc.
And with all this facebook/social media integration, there will be a new influx of the SUPER casual users, which would not have cared for these features or lack there-of in the first place.
I can see Activision - Blizzard's grand vision at the end of this tunnel. As a current consumer of Blizzard products I disagree with many of their recent decisions, but from a SuperCasual third person standpoint - say somebody who plays farmville on facebook - I might one day see an SC2 notification and end up buying the game.
|
On July 08 2010 18:50 Megalisk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2010 18:43 Psychopomp wrote:On July 08 2010 18:37 EmeraldSparks wrote:
Okay, here's things that you might care about:
They're want to monetize Battle.net with respect to Starcraft II (custom maps, god knows what else.)
They show tremendous disregard for the wishes of the community, whether chat channels or this.
It sets precedent for more invasions of privacy (would you like your real name as your BNet handle?)
They seem to think that the consumers, as a general rule, are completely fucking retarded. Free new maps are nice, not an entitlement. As long as I'm not forced to buy them to play ladder games, and it's not 15$ for TWO NEW MAPS AND THREE OLD ONES, I honestly have no issue with paying for new maps. I pay 15$ for an album, and 10$ for a movie ticket, I think I can scrounge up a buck or two for a good map. I'll never understand the love for public chatrooms. Whoopee, I get to talk to a legion of retards. The practical use for Starcraft 2 is almost non-existant, and by the time Diablo 3 rolls around we should have them. While I myself and basically untrackable, and I think the threat of internet psychos is completely overblown, I concede the last point. People, namely women and minorities, will be much easier to harass. Edit(AGAIN!): For those okay with the whole real name thing, like I was, RPS raises some good points. Ever made a chatroom to talk with all of your friends in the same place? Its so clunky in bnet 0.2. Chat rooms make everything so much easier.
Considering I just run the game through Steam, no I've not. I won't deny the current chat system is clunky, I just don't get the appeal of public chat rooms(At least until Diablo 3 comes out). I hear people say things like "It makes it easier to find games," but why not just use the matchmaking? I'm normally opposed to matchmaking, but it's seriously the best matchmaking in existence.
Can someone explain the appeal to me?
|
awesome thread...
The thing is that in facebook only my friends know that I play farmville... nobody else can see that.
But if ACTIVISION do this to battle.net forums they are assuming that I'm friend of every single user in the forum which is absolutely FALSE and beside that, anybody can get in the forums... without ever having a blizzard game.
Kotick will go to hell with a looot of money on his pockets.
![[image loading]](http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/168/kotick.jpg)
sorry for the lack of skills... paint ftw.
|
On July 08 2010 18:43 Psychopomp wrote:
While I myself and basically untrackable
I guess you're not the same psychopomp posting on the judgehype forums and that the last IP you used on irc is a fake one ?
I'd need a recent one to map your location tho, care to login again ?
And I don't even know your name yet...
|
On July 08 2010 18:57 Psychopomp wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2010 18:50 Megalisk wrote:On July 08 2010 18:43 Psychopomp wrote:On July 08 2010 18:37 EmeraldSparks wrote:
Okay, here's things that you might care about:
They're want to monetize Battle.net with respect to Starcraft II (custom maps, god knows what else.)
They show tremendous disregard for the wishes of the community, whether chat channels or this.
It sets precedent for more invasions of privacy (would you like your real name as your BNet handle?)
They seem to think that the consumers, as a general rule, are completely fucking retarded. Free new maps are nice, not an entitlement. As long as I'm not forced to buy them to play ladder games, and it's not 15$ for TWO NEW MAPS AND THREE OLD ONES, I honestly have no issue with paying for new maps. I pay 15$ for an album, and 10$ for a movie ticket, I think I can scrounge up a buck or two for a good map. I'll never understand the love for public chatrooms. Whoopee, I get to talk to a legion of retards. The practical use for Starcraft 2 is almost non-existant, and by the time Diablo 3 rolls around we should have them. While I myself and basically untrackable, and I think the threat of internet psychos is completely overblown, I concede the last point. People, namely women and minorities, will be much easier to harass. Edit(AGAIN!): For those okay with the whole real name thing, like I was, RPS raises some good points. Ever made a chatroom to talk with all of your friends in the same place? Its so clunky in bnet 0.2. Chat rooms make everything so much easier. Considering I just run the game through Steam, no I've not. I won't deny the current chat system is clunky, I just don't get the appeal of public chat rooms(At least until Diablo 3 comes out). I hear people say things like "It makes it easier to find games," but why not just use the matchmaking? I'm normally opposed to matchmaking, but it's seriously the best matchmaking in existence. Can someone explain the appeal to me?
I think it was tasteless who made the point that trying to organise anything involving any number of people like ur esports. Is a nightmare without just being able to make a channel set a password and tell people to be there at a certain time.
|
There's a huge discrepancy between the quality of Bnet2.0 and the game of SC2 itself. This makes it quite plausible for me that Activision is behind the decisions regarding Battle.net, and Blizzard is free to design the core game. The result is that the game is great and a worthy successor to Broodwar, and the Battle.net environment that wraps around it is a huge slap in the face of every half-serious player.
|
On July 08 2010 18:59 Santriell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2010 18:43 Psychopomp wrote:
While I myself and basically untrackable I guess you're not the same psychopomp posting on the judgehype forums and that the last IP you used on irc is a fake one ? I'd need a recent one to map your location tho, care to login again ? And I don't even know your name yet...
I've never even heard of that place.
Also
>Adopt name of Tea Party song as online handle
>No other Psychopomps on the internet
>5 years later
>PSYCHOPOMPS EVERYWHERE
>My face http://myfacewhen.com/416/
|
I don't understand the big hoohah about this. As a player of WoW, WC3 and SC1 and 2, I have no qualms about telling the rest of the world that I game. The "privacy" argument is really quite silly; is gaming illegal or a sin? And so what if your real name is revealed to others? Unless you're a celebrity, I don't think its a major issue (although discrimination might be a problem, Blizzard has shown itself to be quick to ban racist players).
As for Facebook integration, last I heard, it isn't compulsory. So what's the big deal if you can simply just NOT integrate your FB account with your BNet account? While some of us veteran gamers might pine for the old Blizzard, I don't think that Activision is that evil a "Big Brother".
A lot of the people who complain about this issue are the same people who make a lot of noise when governments implement new regulations that affect our privacy. And despite all these complaints and death threats and "the end is nigh" doomsday messages, what happened? NOTHING bad did!
|
On July 08 2010 18:37 EmeraldSparks wrote:
Okay, here's things that you might care about:
They're want to monetize Battle.net with respect to Starcraft II (custom maps, god knows what else.)
They show tremendous disregard for the wishes of the community, whether chat channels or this.
It sets precedent for more invasions of privacy (would you like your real name as your BNet handle?)
They seem to think that the consumers, as a general rule, are completely fucking retarded.
I know this will piss some people off... but consumers, as a general rule, are completely fucking retarded.
Corporations only get away with as much as the consumer will allow. People still pay dude. This is why it happens.
|
I think the "Golden age" of gaming are long gone.
Those of us who wished for another SC1 style community in SC2 were/are obviously sadly mistaken.
Not sure if I will be purchasing SC2 or any other Blizzard titles in future.
I'm just happy I was part of the good times while they lasted. I really feel for people who are 12-16 yo now who will never be able to experience what I did.
What Blizzard are doing, doesn't really make any sense. Doesn't make sense from any standpoint, just a series of bad decisions on their part which ultimately won't work to make any additional revenue. The real test for Blizzard will be how long they can go with this approach before they are forced to go back to the tried and tested business model of giving customers what they want.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
