| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
tnud
Sweden2233 Posts
On February 07 2012 06:44 Shockk wrote: Alright, I gave the OP a slight overhaul. - better spacing - now with pictures! (courtesy of Goblinoid, see his work in the links in the OP) Looking awesome! Needs to look pro if they are gonna read it in the end. I can't imagine they haven't heard this before but we still want change! | ||
Falling
Canada11573 Posts
Edit. One further thing. A lot of what the OP talks about is what we used to have and don't have anymore with no replacement. And a lot of that is trying to bring it from 0.2 back up to 1.0. But to really bring it up to 2.0, there's a couple other features that could be added. Embedded streams to major tournaments just like LoL does would be HUGE and really all Blizzard would ever need to do to promote tournaments. Battlenet: Promoting Esports /shameless self promotion. But it's not so much that as it is making Battlenet a truly awesome place that is worthy of being called 2.0 Double Edit Just reading my old post, it feels like a different life as none of that hold true anymore. I don't watch the GSL, none of my friends play SC2 anymore- one hasn't been on for 39 weeks. Blah what happened? | ||
|
Xapti
Canada2473 Posts
It is mostly just flash but I think there's some difference's probably mostly involved with 3d interaction. Even though it's used in many major games, I still don't like it, at least in Starcraft 2 the way it was implemented. The main thing that's quite nice about it is the XML&CSS support, but I would think many UI systems can do that. | ||
|
Kezzer
United States1268 Posts
On February 07 2012 04:08 Djeez wrote: (...) heard a rumour that Blizzard was planning on updating B.Net functionality ALOT for SC2, they are well aware that the Legendary map makers such as yourself are PISSED OFF about the lobby system and I heard at Blizzcon (been going every year YAY!) that they want to re-vamp it and that they still want to implement the map sale system where map makers can charge for a "subscription" to their map, say 1 time buy of $5 and the map is yours and updated for life. (...) Have no idea if that information is legit or not, so take that with a grain of salt. Stuff I found hanging about old BW map makers page. Post was written last week. This would make my day. I hopped on WC3 today again for old time sake and the difference in genuine "features" (not facebook integration, or "most popular maps") was astounding. It is shocking that the people at Activision Blizzard don't see how they are losing sales from the expansion by making BNet 2.0 so horrible. SO MANY people I knew used to play SC2 when it came out have stopped. When I got bored with ladder in WC3, I played in some custom games, maybe trying a new one that I saw. I played a tourney. I hopped on a chat channel. There were fantastic ways to just chill out. Chilling out in SC2? uhhh play nexus wars for the billionth time? mineralz? the same maps that have been on the most popular since beta? | ||
|
Shockk
Germany2269 Posts
On February 07 2012 07:23 Falling wrote: Wow. That OP is really rocking since I last looked. Well done. Edit. One further thing. A lot of what the OP talks about is what we used to have and don't have anymore with no replacement. And a lot of that is trying to bring it from 0.2 back up to 1.0. But to really bring it up to 2.0, there's a couple other features that could be added. Embedded streams to major tournaments just like LoL does would be HUGE and really all Blizzard would ever need to do to promote tournaments. Battlenet: Promoting Esports /shameless self promotion. But it's not so much that as it is making Battlenet a truly awesome place that is worthy of being called 2.0 Double Edit Just reading my old post, it feels like a different life as none of that hold true anymore. I don't watch the GSL, none of my friends play SC2 anymore- one hasn't been on for 39 weeks. Blah what happened? Thanks, I did invest some time into the post and I think it's finally somewhat presentable  .The move to a true 2.0 Battle.Net would be great. People have often been wondering why LoL tournaments had viewer numbers that easily trumped major SC2 events, and they wouldn't believe that folks could actually watch the streams through their game client. But we also need more awareness in the community. Even here on TL, a community that I think is much better informed than the vast majority out there, plenty of people had no idea about what kind of features didn't get transitioned from SC/BW and WC3 to SC2's interface. On the official forums, that number is even higher. People can only be properly rallied behind something when they know what's to gain or rather what they're missing out on. Doesn't mean that we shouldn't ask for 2.0 features right away as well. I included your concept thread in the list of links in my OP, and I also added some new (early) UI concepts by Goblinoid. | ||
|
Meatloaf
Spain664 Posts
hope they put their shit together with HotS and bring an actual overhaul to the whole lobby and specially custom maps as is a pain in the ass to play what you actually want and not whats featured or in the "cool" list. Blizzard hire that guy please , he envisions it as it should. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10910 Posts
The "leveling" System was just a bit weird and not that good. Ahm.. Yeah, thats about it. Oh, and it had LAN. SC2? Well...... It's all here in this tread ^^. | ||
|
Vei
United States2845 Posts
 it was like the concept of leagues except instead of 6 there were 50+ | ||
|
ionONE
Germany605 Posts
 ) and the problem is known since early 2010.We still need to thank you for implementing the chat channels? move on!, start the old wc3/bw ... look what you done in the past and implement it into the new bnet anno 2010(2) | ||
|
Shiladie
Canada1631 Posts
| ||
|
SigmaoctanusIV
United States3313 Posts
| ||
|
D2HLC
Cook Islands22 Posts
| ||
|
gosu86
208 Posts
its obvious they dont give a shit about their sc base fans because well we dont make enough money for them to care thats exactly why i wont buy the expansion =) | ||
|
Bareleon
371 Posts
What will really be cool is to have an in-game forum. That will be a huge community boost. Like, as soon as someone logs on to SC2, they are shown in the "who's online list" on the in-game forums. We can all post in there and what not. | ||
|
Fealthas
607 Posts
| ||
|
magnaflow
Canada1521 Posts
Compared to the original StarCraft, StarCraft II was designed to focus more heavily on the multiplayer aspect, with changes that include major improvements to Battle.net, a new competitive "ladder" system for ranked games, and new matchmaking mechanics that are designed to "match-up" players of equal skill level.[1] In addition, the replay function, which allows players to record and review past games, was improved. Blizzard also stated that they incorporated changes to the game that were suggested by fans.[70] StarCraft II continues its predecessor's use of pre-rendered cinematic cut scenes to advance the plot while also improving the quality of in-game cut scenes within the levels themselves, which are rendered on-the-fly using the same game engine as the graphics in the game proper. Blizzard stated that, with the new graphics engine that StarCraft II uses to render the gameplay, they "can actually create in-game cut-scenes of near-cinematic quality".[71] Improvements include advanced scenery allocation and more detailed space terrain, such as floating space platforms with planets and asteroids in the background. Small cliffs, extensions, and even advertising signs were also shown to have been improved and refined Here is a pic that is also there ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/IQi0G.jpg) | ||
|
Mysti_
France185 Posts
@OP: I understand this topic has to be a positive message to Blizzard from the community, but if they don't even deign answering our call maybe you should add this link to your op : http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128252 it's a full recap of how Activision Blizzard or how Battle.net 2.0 came to be, it is not only eye opening but it will also help everyone understand why Blizzard doesn't care about the game and how the CEO of activision sees us all as milky cows he wants to abuse more and more. Here are some extracts: About the LAN mode + Show Spoiler + June 28, 2009: A few more details of the new Battle.Net 2.0 get out, for instance that StarCraft II and Diablo III will not offer a LAN-mode anymore (so everyone that wants to play with you, including friends and family HAS to buy a copy of the game and all Add-Ons and give Blizzard them $$) and that it might contain a few “monetized features” and micro transactions. Clarification for the above statement: StarCraft I, WarCraft II and Diablo had a feature called "Spawn installation", with which you could legally install the same game with the same CD-Key on a friends or family members PC, with the restriction that the SinglePlayer couldn't be played from the "Spawn version" and they could only join Multiplayer games, you, with the Original CD-Key and Installation were in. While the feature wasn't there specifically for WarCraft III, LAN games with the same CD-Key were still possible, this helped people try out the game with friends and buy it if they liked it, I personally know of at least 3 sales by friends attributed to this feature. The new version of B.Net 2.0 works in such a way, that even when living under the same roof and another person only wanting to try the game or play with you casually, they still have to own a full second copy of the game + all Add-On keys to be able to do this. Disgusting statement of the Activision CEO Robert Kotick + Show Spoiler + Kotick noted that in the past he changed the employee incentive program so that it "really rewards profit and nothing else." He continued, "You have studio heads who five years ago didn't know the difference between a balance sheet and a bed sheet who are now arguing allocations in our CFO's office pretty regularly. ... We have a real culture of thrift. The goal that I had in bringing a lot of the packaged goods folks into Activision about 10 years ago was to take all the fun out of making video games." Yes, he just said that. Ultimately, Kotick doesn't want his employees to take anything for granted. They should always be aware of "skepticism, pessimism, and fear" in the midst of the global economic downturn. "We are very good at keeping people focused on the deep depression," he said. What would Kotick do if he could make one change. He apparently wouldn't make his employees happier or create a better working environment, he wouldn't want to create a new succesful original IP but he'd make Call of Duty a subscription based service as soon as he could... + Show Spoiler + WSJ: If you could snap your fingers, and instantly make one change in your company, what would it be, and why? Mr. Kotick: I would have Call of Duty be an online subscription service tomorrow. When you think about what the audience's interests are and how you could really satisfy bigger audiences with more inspired, creative opportunities, I would love to see us have an online Call of Duty world. I think our players would just have so much of a more compelling experience. WSJ: Is that coming? Mr. Kotick: Hopefully. WSJ: Are the customers ready for it? Mr. Kotick: I think our audiences are clamoring for it. If you look at what they're playing on Xbox Live today, we've had 1.7 billion hours of multiplayer play on Live. I think we could do a lot more to really satisfy the interests of the customers. I think we could create so many things, and make the game even more fun to play. We haven't really had a chance to do that yet, so that would be my snap of the fingers. ![[image loading]](http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/215546990_Nq5Qk-L-2.jpg) I hope this will help people truly understand why sc2 is left as it is and why Blizzard has radically changed since Wc3 and ScBW TLDR: Blizzard has no control anymore on what they do, Activision has made radical changes to how Blizzard conceives games and if we don't move things will only get worse. They'll push their greediness as far as we let them go. It's time to stand up or accept the aftermaths of our docility. | ||
|
DannyJ
United States5110 Posts
 | ||
|
Bareleon
371 Posts
On February 07 2012 11:37 Mysti_ wrote: What is really disrespectful for their customers is the absolute lack of communication. When I see the DICE (Battlefield 3) or RIOT (League of Legends) developers they always inform people with twitter and community forums about what exactly they're working on, and when / what are the next features that are going to be added / tweaked to their respectful games. Also they listen to feedback while blizzard is bullshitting us, they act like they want us to give them feedback but they don't give a fuck about what we tell them since now everything that matters to them is making money, not making the game better. @OP: I understand this topic has to be a positive message to Blizzard from the community, but if they don't even deign answering our call maybe you should add this link to your op : http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128252 it's a full recap of how Activision Blizzard or how Battle.net 2.0 came to be, it is not only eye opening but it will also help everyone understand why Blizzard doesn't care about the game and how the CEO of activision sees us all as milky cows he wants to abuse more and more. Here are some extracts: About the LAN mode + Show Spoiler + June 28, 2009: A few more details of the new Battle.Net 2.0 get out, for instance that StarCraft II and Diablo III will not offer a LAN-mode anymore (so everyone that wants to play with you, including friends and family HAS to buy a copy of the game and all Add-Ons and give Blizzard them $$) and that it might contain a few “monetized features” and micro transactions. Clarification for the above statement: StarCraft I, WarCraft II and Diablo had a feature called "Spawn installation", with which you could legally install the same game with the same CD-Key on a friends or family members PC, with the restriction that the SinglePlayer couldn't be played from the "Spawn version" and they could only join Multiplayer games, you, with the Original CD-Key and Installation were in. While the feature wasn't there specifically for WarCraft III, LAN games with the same CD-Key were still possible, this helped people try out the game with friends and buy it if they liked it, I personally know of at least 3 sales by friends attributed to this feature. The new version of B.Net 2.0 works in such a way, that even when living under the same roof and another person only wanting to try the game or play with you casually, they still have to own a full second copy of the game + all Add-On keys to be able to do this. Disgusting statement of the Activision CEO Robert Kotick + Show Spoiler + Kotick noted that in the past he changed the employee incentive program so that it "really rewards profit and nothing else." He continued, "You have studio heads who five years ago didn't know the difference between a balance sheet and a bed sheet who are now arguing allocations in our CFO's office pretty regularly. ... We have a real culture of thrift. The goal that I had in bringing a lot of the packaged goods folks into Activision about 10 years ago was to take all the fun out of making video games." Yes, he just said that. Ultimately, Kotick doesn't want his employees to take anything for granted. They should always be aware of "skepticism, pessimism, and fear" in the midst of the global economic downturn. "We are very good at keeping people focused on the deep depression," he said. What would Korlick do if he could make one change. He apparently wouldn't make his employees happier or create a better working environment, he wouldn't want to create a new succesful original IP but he'd make Call of Duty a subscription based service as soon as he could... + Show Spoiler + WSJ: If you could snap your fingers, and instantly make one change in your company, what would it be, and why? Mr. Kotick: I would have Call of Duty be an online subscription service tomorrow. When you think about what the audience's interests are and how you could really satisfy bigger audiences with more inspired, creative opportunities, I would love to see us have an online Call of Duty world. I think our players would just have so much of a more compelling experience. WSJ: Is that coming? Mr. Kotick: Hopefully. WSJ: Are the customers ready for it? Mr. Kotick: I think our audiences are clamoring for it. If you look at what they're playing on Xbox Live today, we've had 1.7 billion hours of multiplayer play on Live. I think we could do a lot more to really satisfy the interests of the customers. I think we could create so many things, and make the game even more fun to play. We haven't really had a chance to do that yet, so that would be my snap of the fingers. I hope this will help people truly understand why sc2 is left as it is and why Blizzard has radically changed since Wc3 and ScBW TLDR: Blizzard has no control anymore on what they do, Activision has made radical changes to how Blizzard conceives games and if we don't move nothing will change, things can only get worse ! It's time to stand up, the ui is only one of the aftermath. Blizzard did state before that Activision has very little control over them. And if I was making a good game, I wouldn't want mine to be pirated as well, hence why no lan. | ||
|
Mysti_
France185 Posts
On February 07 2012 11:42 Bareleon wrote: Blizzard did state before that Activision has very little control over them. And if I was making a good game, I wouldn't want mine to be pirated as well, hence why no lan. You can believe them if you want, but I don't. | ||
| ||
|
|
GSL
Replay Cast
WardiTV Weekly
PiGosaur Cup
The PondCast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
