EPT"The Real World: Starcraft". Or Bel'Shir Shore?
[Show] Inside The Game - Official Thread - Page 361
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
HackBenjamin
Canada1094 Posts
"The Real World: Starcraft". Or Bel'Shir Shore? | ||
|
CikaZombi
Serbia630 Posts
On October 26 2012 09:36 iNcontroL wrote: ty cikzombi <3 I appreciate not having to defend myself all the time.. and I am not being sarcastic. You rock <3 You are making me blush sir :D On a more serious note, I'm just saying what I believe is right, and not getting the trolls get to me. As sorry as I was to see you not attending SotG this season, now I think that's the best damn move you made all year. (I guess the marriage thing is ok too  ) | ||
|
OveRtheStarS
Canada69 Posts
Disparaging remarks against each other proves nothing other than ego, and does not help anything. Wheat imo acted very poorly, for someone who claims to be a legitimate eSports personality. Maybe he should play the devils advocate a little more. It's bad that the community is supposedly "hyper sensitive", but then you watch these so called "professionals" acting like 3 year olds when their personal image of the situation is called into question. I don't see any difference. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 26 2012 09:36 Portlandian wrote: They didn't make any changes. They released a couple mockups that would take a few hours at most, and a blog post. That's it. Joystiq.com proves you incorrect: From the article: Blizzard has plans for XP bonuses as well, either for specific awards like your first win of the day, or for more general happenings like XP bonus weekends and other special events. The leveling system is being added to the beta in the next patch (and will likely be reset a few times during testing), and will eventually be available in Heart of the Swarm when it's released. | ||
|
corpuscle
United States1967 Posts
| ||
|
PviLLe3
United States305 Posts
| ||
|
Northern_iight
Canada363 Posts
One questions though, on incontrol's statement. The game is sustainable as long as there are 100k +/- viewers for tournaments. That is correct as 100k consistent viewers is definitely a market but how do we know there will be 100k +/- viewers in the future? I think SC2 was at it's peak during and after TSL3. Everybody I knew watched it and it had around 50k viewers for the finals. TSL4, to me, seemed alot smaller than TSL3. I think I remember that it had around 15k viewers for finals. I'm only using TSL as an example because TSL3 was just so huge. Now, the first logical argument is that 10x as many tournaments are now going on during the weekends compared to TSL3. If we look at the viewer loyalty, shouldn't the same viewers that enjoyed TSL3 so much have come back to watch TSL4? If people are so easy to jump tournaments, on other bandwagons and different games what makes you think SC2 will be able to sustain that 100k viewership? Are we relying on the fact that SC2 is the only popular RTS? | ||
|
Portlandian
Belgium153 Posts
On October 26 2012 11:10 Plansix wrote: Joystiq.com proves you incorrect: From the article: Blizzard has plans for XP bonuses as well, either for specific awards like your first win of the day, or for more general happenings like XP bonus weekends and other special events. The leveling system is being added to the beta in the next patch (and will likely be reset a few times during testing), and will eventually be available in Heart of the Swarm when it's released. That proves me correct, as it is discussing a future patch. That is to say, these changes haven't been made. It's discussing the future. As I said before, I will repeat this simple and 100% accurate fact you seem to be avoiding: They didn't make any changes. They released a couple mockups that would take a few hours at most, and a blog post. That's it. This argument is getting extremely silly. Don't be so ridiculously defensive that you can't admit simple facts like the fact Blizzard didn't release a patch, they released a blog post that would take a couple hours of work from one person at most. And their hasty blog post was an obvious reaction to the negative publicity being generated. | ||
|
corpuscle
United States1967 Posts
On October 26 2012 11:18 Portlandian wrote: That proves me correct, as it is discussing a future patch. That is to say, these changes haven't been made. It's discussing the future. As I said before, I will repeat this simple and 100% accurate fact you seem to be avoiding: They didn't make any changes. They released a couple mockups that would take a few hours at most, and a blog post. That's it. This argument is getting extremely silly. Don't be so ridiculously defensive that you can't admit simple facts like the fact Blizzard didn't release a patch, they released a blog post that would take a couple hours of work from one person at most. And their hasty blog post was an obvious reaction to the negative publicity being generated. Do you have any fucking idea how software development works? Do you honestly think that "spend two hours on a mockup" means that they can release a working model in a week or two (HotS patches are coming really fast)? Systems like battle.net are insanely complicated and adding something new onto them is not a week or even month-long project, it takes a buttload of dev time to make even minor changes. Battle.net is a massive networking environment that spans across three completely different games, there's undoubtedly hundreds if not millions of lines of code to deal with here. | ||
|
Portlandian
Belgium153 Posts
On October 26 2012 11:11 corpuscle wrote: People saying that the new HotS updates are just some graphic designer dicking around in Photoshop to make a mockup to appease the masses: no, you are wrong, read more carefully. The XP system which was just previewed is something that's coming in the next beta patch, and that definitely took longer than a week for the dev team to throw together. Fucking read the information that's available to you before you run around smearing shit everywhere, this is getting really annoying. In other words, it's not out yet and all they have shown us is a couple mockups and a blog posts. | ||
|
TheFrankOne
United States667 Posts
On October 26 2012 11:12 Northern_iight wrote: Just watched the episode... great episode, really an eye opener. Love incontrol's acting/mocking... I actually laughed hard enough to spill shit all over. One questions though, on incontrol's statement. The game is sustainable as long as there are 100k +/- viewers for tournaments. That is correct as 100k consistent viewers is definitely a market but how do we know there will be 100k +/- viewers in the future? I think SC2 was at it's peak during and after TSL3. Everybody I knew watched it and it had around 50k viewers for the finals. TSL4, to me, seemed alot smaller than TSL3. I think I remember that it had around 15k viewers for finals. I'm only using TSL as an example because TSL3 was just so huge. Now, the first logical argument is that 10x as many tournaments are now going on during the weekends compared to TSL3. If we look at the viewer loyalty, shouldn't the same viewers that enjoyed TSL3 so much have come back to watch TSL4? If people are so easy to jump tournaments, on other bandwagons and different games what makes you think SC2 will be able to sustain that 100k viewership? Are we relying on the fact that SC2 is the only popular RTS? TSL4 just didn't have the same hype, I enjoyed it immensely, but I just don't feel the hype was the same I watched VODs instead of rearranging my schedule. It was "just another tournament" not something with Koreans being just knocked out right and left with builds I've never seen, Thorzain even went mech vs toss because thors had no energy. The game was just different and the tournament scene was lacking the saturationw e have now. It was just a high quality tournament with Koreans in the finals. WCS Europe got 100k views, some tournaments just kind of decline between seasons, but some get better and somtimes other, bigger ones show up. | ||
|
corpuscle
United States1967 Posts
On October 26 2012 11:23 Portlandian wrote: In other words, it's not out yet and all they have shown us is a couple mockups and a blog posts. See the post above you, you're being really dumb. Anyone that knows anything about programming and/or software engineering would 100% tell you that adding something like the XP system is a major underhauling that takes a long time, and has certainly been in the works since before the #savehots shitstorm. | ||
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
On October 26 2012 10:16 Portlandian wrote: Are you really trying to derail the conversation now that you made a fool of yourself and have no leg to stand on? i think its important to determine the legitimacy of this conversation. and i am constantly making a fool of myself, but i dont think i have done so far with my conversation with you. | ||
|
Portlandian
Belgium153 Posts
On October 26 2012 11:23 corpuscle wrote: Do you have any fucking idea how software development works? Do you honestly think that "spend two hours on a mockup" means that they can release a working model in a week or two (HotS patches are coming really fast)? Systems like battle.net are insanely complicated and adding something new onto them is not a week or even month-long project, it takes a buttload of dev time to make even minor changes. Battle.net is a massive networking environment that spans across three completely different games, there's undoubtedly hundreds if not millions of lines of code to deal with here. How many weeks do you think it took them to prepare the blog post? It was a clear reaction to the negative publicity, to try and defuse the situation. You can dance around that all you want but this is just silly. You are silly. It doesn't take weeks of preparation to release a blog with some mockup photos and intended future features. The claims of how difficult it is to tack on an XP system are irrelevant, but also quite silly. It wouldn't be much programming work at all to reward XP and change the portraits to XP rewards. Easily under a weeks work for one programmer. There is no evidence it was in the pipeline before Destiny's post, but it is still irrelevant if it was. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 26 2012 11:18 Portlandian wrote: That proves me correct, as it is discussing a future patch. That is to say, these changes haven't been made. It's discussing the future. As I said before, I will repeat this simple and 100% accurate fact you seem to be avoiding: They didn't make any changes. They released a couple mockups that would take a few hours at most, and a blog post. That's it. This argument is getting extremely silly. Don't be so ridiculously defensive that you can't admit simple facts like the fact Blizzard didn't release a patch, they released a blog post that would take a couple hours of work from one person at most. And their hasty blog post was an obvious reaction to the negative publicity being generated. Nice try amend your argument: On October 26 2012 09:13 Portlandian wrote: They didn't redesign the UI, they just released a couple mockups and a writeup saying their intentions. Isn't it a bit daft to claim these changes have been in the works for months? Just a few months ago they released the 1.5 patch, which they intended to settle the UI issues. You think after releasing the patch which they intended to fix the UI, they immediately started work on another new UI? Do you have any evidence they were working on those mockups and writeup for months? In this post you clearly imply that the changes have not been worked on for months and where mock ups thrown together in response to Destiny's reddit post. However, to be released in the next beta patch, they would have to be worked on months in advance to address bugs and create the installer for the patch. I know that you will find it hard to believe that changes like that take so long, but anyone who is familiar with any level of programming will affirm that development is a long process and bug testing takes even longer. Now I know you don't like facts, multiculturalism, or certified documents proving someone was born in a specific location. I am sure you will be able to bend your perception of reality enough so you are still correct. I am now going to follow my fathers advice and stop arguing with a fool. | ||
|
aZealot
New Zealand5447 Posts
On October 26 2012 11:26 corpuscle wrote: See the post above you, you're being really dumb. Anyone that knows anything about programming and/or software engineering would 100% tell you that adding something like the XP system is a major underhauling that takes a long time, and has certainly been in the works since before the #savehots shitstorm. More to the point, Blizzard is a huge company and like most huge companies quite bureaucractic. As someone who works in a large company, "simple shit" can take a lot of time to put through with all the prioritization, approvals and sign-offs involved. It's not a matter of pressing a button and going "Hey, Presto! Done!". Edit/ Nevermind, the guy is either a troll or a blithering idiot. Of course, these days on TL it's hard to tell the difference. | ||
|
Leth0
856 Posts
| ||
|
Portlandian
Belgium153 Posts
On October 26 2012 11:26 corpuscle wrote: See the post above you, you're being really dumb. Anyone that knows anything about programming and/or software engineering would 100% tell you that adding something like the XP system is a major underhauling that takes a long time, and has certainly been in the works since before the #savehots shitstorm. Major underhauling? No, it's just adding an XP field to a database, deciding what numbers the levels and portrait rewards are at, and assigning an XP value to each unit killed/produced. This is an incredibly simple change. I am a programmer myself. I don't think you are. | ||
|
Portlandian
Belgium153 Posts
On October 26 2012 11:31 Plansix wrote: Nice try amend your argument: In this post you clearly imply that the changes have not been worked on for months and where mock ups thrown together in response to Destiny's reddit post. However, to be released in the next beta patch, they would have to be worked on months in advance to address bugs and create the installer for the patch. Now I know you don't like facts, multiculturalism, or certified documents proving someone was born in a specific location. I am sure you will be able to bend your perception of reality enough so you are still correct. I am now going to follow my fathers advice and stop arguing with a fool. They obviously haven't been working on it for months, if that were the case they would have it done by now. Don't be absurd. Furthermore months ago they released the 1.5 patch, intended to fix the UI. Why would they have immediately started on a new UI after that? What was the purpose of the 1.5 UI then? It doesn't make the slightest bit of sense to claim they have been working on this for months. It's absolutely ludicrous really, and you have no evidence at all. It only surfaced after the negative publicity for HOTS. Maybe they had started bandying about the idea internally a few days or weeks before the negative publicity campaign, but obviously the hasty blog post made when all they have to show is a couple mockups and goals was a response to the growing negative publicity. So what exactly is your argument at this point? Negative publicity can and does get a reaction from Blizzard. It's proven to work. It worked this time, it worked when they removed the Warhound, and it can work in the future if people keep it up. That's why EG are defending Blizzard from the negative publicity. Because it works, and they are afraid of it. | ||
|
VanGarde
Sweden755 Posts
On October 26 2012 11:33 Portlandian wrote: Major underhauling? No, it's just adding an XP field to a database, deciding what numbers the levels and portrait rewards are at, and assigning an XP value to each unit killed/produced. This is an incredibly simple change. I am a programmer myself. I don't think you are. lol, this guy. With a statement like that you are either a terrible programmer or you never actually worked on a project but by being a programmer you mean that you have written textbook console applications in c#. | ||
| ||
