|
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?
my mistake. rofl.
|
On July 08 2010 19:01 Scorch wrote:
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.
I agree with this completely. The game is amazing, but Bnet 2.0 is sorry as shit, so it's easy to believe the fault to be Activision's. I don't mind the facebook integration, but shit... I hope something happens, because there is so much more lacking from Bnet than just chat channels. Hopefully this post-release patch shines down upon us like a rainbow with skittles and lucky fuckin' charms...
|
On July 08 2010 19:07 Drakan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2010 18:57 Psychopomp wrote: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? You might be untrackable and stuff, but some other people are... Sorry to say that you are not the only one in the world. People have died thanks to psychopaths in game... and you only need 1 dead player to argument why REALID is a bad idea inside a GAME enviroment. Facebook is 1 thing, World of warcraft / counter strike / etc, are others. Most of WoW players are males and most of those players when they meet a girl that play the game they just harass her. In other social networking that doesn't happen because its almost 50/50, and you add your real life friends (man and girls) so its absolutely different. And if you don't want to understand the point, then just go and be a fucking Nazi.
l2read
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.
|
Not really sure what to believe. We really can't know what *truly* goes on inside Blizzard. But we do care about them despite all the craziness. We want them to be the best, and I hope they will.
And personally, I don't think the trolls have anything to do with the forum change. Perhaps something else is going on; maybe I'm wrong though.
The thing is, the facebook opt-in and that stuff helps to promote the game which equals more sales which equals better chance for sc2 esports money.
But, this forum change just seems odd and unrelated. I like having an avatar :D We all do. Super casuals do too. And our own preferences aside, I think it's a problem for children and the like. They will end up on the forum, and now it will be their real name showing.
Like people have said (including Blizzard), forums are optional; we may like the blizz forums, but we don't have to go there. Oh well.
|
And there we go again. Activision-hatred thread number 5000.
|
On July 08 2010 19:10 Psychopomp wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2010 19:07 Drakan wrote:On July 08 2010 18:57 Psychopomp wrote: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? You might be untrackable and stuff, but some other people are... Sorry to say that you are not the only one in the world. People have died thanks to psychopaths in game... and you only need 1 dead player to argument why REALID is a bad idea inside a GAME enviroment. Facebook is 1 thing, World of warcraft / counter strike / etc, are others. Most of WoW players are males and most of those players when they meet a girl that play the game they just harass her. In other social networking that doesn't happen because its almost 50/50, and you add your real life friends (man and girls) so its absolutely different. And if you don't want to understand the point, then just go and be a fucking Nazi. l2read Show nested quote +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.
You might be untrackable and stuff, but some other people are...
Sorry to say that you are not the only one in the world.
Stop being such a prick.
|
Best read I've had in a while, I got a friend in blizz France, ill ask him one of these days what he thinks about this if he is allowed to talk about it of course.
|
On July 08 2010 19:16 Drakan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2010 19:10 Psychopomp wrote:On July 08 2010 19:07 Drakan wrote:On July 08 2010 18:57 Psychopomp wrote: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? You might be untrackable and stuff, but some other people are... Sorry to say that you are not the only one in the world. People have died thanks to psychopaths in game... and you only need 1 dead player to argument why REALID is a bad idea inside a GAME enviroment. Facebook is 1 thing, World of warcraft / counter strike / etc, are others. Most of WoW players are males and most of those players when they meet a girl that play the game they just harass her. In other social networking that doesn't happen because its almost 50/50, and you add your real life friends (man and girls) so its absolutely different. And if you don't want to understand the point, then just go and be a fucking Nazi. l2read 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. You might be untrackable and stuff, but some other people are... Sorry to say that you are not the only one in the world. Stop being such a prick.
Are you just saying words, without reading? I said I was against this. Take your own advice and
Stop being such a prick.
|
|
|
I read somewhere that sc2 custom maps can be uploaded to battle.net and have a price attached to them. I asume blizzard-activision would get like 50% of that, which i believe is complete bs. Quick guys lets abuse the awsome blizzard map editor to make money from not doing anything at all muahhahaha.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 08 2010 19:15 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote:
And there we go again. Activision-hatred thread number 5000.
They bring it on themselves.
|
On July 08 2010 19:07 Necrosjef wrote:
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.
This. I have the same opinion. Its not about "Gaming" anymore its about Business --> max profit --> please the casual player as much as you can --> ignore the wishes of the Gamer.
This how you get max profit and profit means happy shareholder.
When Valve is gone it means for us old folks gg.
Activision-Blizzard is no more at least imho. I cant wait to see in what way theyre gonna fuck up D3 :/
|
On July 08 2010 19:28 Psychopomp wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2010 19:16 Drakan wrote:On July 08 2010 19:10 Psychopomp wrote:On July 08 2010 19:07 Drakan wrote:On July 08 2010 18:57 Psychopomp wrote: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? You might be untrackable and stuff, but some other people are... Sorry to say that you are not the only one in the world. People have died thanks to psychopaths in game... and you only need 1 dead player to argument why REALID is a bad idea inside a GAME enviroment. Facebook is 1 thing, World of warcraft / counter strike / etc, are others. Most of WoW players are males and most of those players when they meet a girl that play the game they just harass her. In other social networking that doesn't happen because its almost 50/50, and you add your real life friends (man and girls) so its absolutely different. And if you don't want to understand the point, then just go and be a fucking Nazi. l2read 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. You might be untrackable and stuff, but some other people are... Sorry to say that you are not the only one in the world. Stop being such a prick. Are you just saying words, without reading? I said I was against this. Take your own advice and
lol, misread badly.
|
Good OP, I hope you're right about blizzard not actually being happy about the shitty decisions that are being made.
about facebook I dont get why people dont just make a new email account (many people have multiple ones anyways) and get a new battle.net account with a fake name. Takes less than 5 minutes.
I was surprised that only 9% voted for this option in the realID poll
|
For those of you who still think the Real ID thing isn't a big deal:
http://kotaku.com/5550609/man-spends-six-months-plotting-murder-of-counter strike-rival
And trust me there are plenty of other examples that's just the most recent one that I can remember. Beyond that, honestly is it so fucking hard for people to understand that no one should be forced to have their real name displayed to post in a forum for a fucking video game just to prevent "trolls"?
It really sucks because first it was the no LAN support, then there were rumors that BNet 2.0 was going to be pay-to-play (luckily untrue), then came the death of chat rooms and no cross region play, and now there's this Real ID issue. It's sad that a game I was looking so forward to is already a bit disappointing before it even launches. I guess what's even more sad is that I'm still going to buy it as none of these flaws will be fixed when the game sells well despite all of the idiotic things they're implementing. I really don't know if I should be blaming Activision or Blizzard for all of this but my gut is saying that neither one is completely innocent.
|
On July 08 2010 19:37 Drakan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2010 19:28 Psychopomp wrote:On July 08 2010 19:16 Drakan wrote:On July 08 2010 19:10 Psychopomp wrote:On July 08 2010 19:07 Drakan wrote:On July 08 2010 18:57 Psychopomp wrote: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? You might be untrackable and stuff, but some other people are... Sorry to say that you are not the only one in the world. People have died thanks to psychopaths in game... and you only need 1 dead player to argument why REALID is a bad idea inside a GAME enviroment. Facebook is 1 thing, World of warcraft / counter strike / etc, are others. Most of WoW players are males and most of those players when they meet a girl that play the game they just harass her. In other social networking that doesn't happen because its almost 50/50, and you add your real life friends (man and girls) so its absolutely different. And if you don't want to understand the point, then just go and be a fucking Nazi. l2read 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. You might be untrackable and stuff, but some other people are... Sorry to say that you are not the only one in the world. Stop being such a prick. Are you just saying words, without reading? I said I was against this. Take your own advice and Stop being such a prick. lol, misread badly.
It's cool.
|
On July 08 2010 19:36 smileyyy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2010 19:07 Necrosjef wrote:
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. This. I have the same opinion. Its not about "Gaming" anymore its about Business --> max profit --> please the casual player as much as you can --> ignore the wishes of the Gamer. This how you get max profit and profit means happy shareholder. When Valve is gone it means for us old folks gg. Activision-Blizzard is no more at least imho. I cant wait to see in what way theyre gonna fuck up D3 :/
Where they are wrong is that they believe they will make more money by doing this. The whole reason 80mil people play farmville is that it is free. If you started charging $50 to buy farmville I don't think you would have anyone playing it.
This is Blizzard simply not doing their homework on their target market. These are people who simply have no interest in playing competitive games and even less interest in spending money on buying games.
What Blizzard is doing isn't even catering to casual gamers. Its pretty clear that no one wants what Blizzard is peddling casual/hardcore/whatever. Just need to see how long it takes them before they wake up and smell whats cookin'.
|
Well Activision killed IW, and MW2 was a massive fail on the PC.
But Blizzard itself is pretty huge with Diablo/Warcraft/Starcraft.
Would have been a lot better if Blizzard didn't merge with Activision :/....y did they again?
|
On July 08 2010 19:37 7mk wrote:
Good OP, I hope you're right about blizzard not actually being happy about the shitty decisions that are being made.
about facebook I dont get why people dont just make a new email account (many people have multiple ones anyways) and get a new battle.net account with a fake name. Takes less than 5 minutes.
I was surprised that only 9% voted for this option in the realID poll
I think alot of the anti-Facebook stuff is not really that people hate using Facebook and going through the procedure of making a face Facebook account etc.
Its that Battle.net 2.0 is shit for lack of a better term. Instead of making it better with meaningful features which people are asking for (Improved Ladders, Chatrooms etc.) Blizzard instead chose to spend time and effort adding facebook integration, which I'm pretty sure no one asked for.
Thats really where alot of the bitterness is coming from about this stuff is that no one wants it and yet we are getting this stuff instead of things we are actually requesting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
