|
Not playing another Activision game after this. No HotS no D3, no "titan". Their games are not good anymore, the only thing that was keeping me playing these games was the amazing experiences I have had with their past games. I do not like Activision, I liked Warcraft 3 RoC, TFT, SCBW, and WoW up to WotLK. These feelings of enjoyment are just projected onto their company as if anything they produce will be as good, the fact is, they should be. But they are not.
It is a sad day seeing the producers of the majority of my favorite games become about money. It seems everything becomes about money in the end. Day9 running ads on the daily; I stopped watching, keep that to the archives. Don't know what's going on. Things change I guess, I shouldn't get too attached to the past.
There are other games out there, Activison is about money now, time to move on, thats that. My advice for everyone that agrees with this thread: stop blindly buying ActivisonBlizzard games. Check them out, if they don't have what you want, don't buy it. Just because its a ActivisonBizzard game does not make it amazing, SC2 is an obvious example.
My heart goes out to all of you who grew up to Blizzard games, those were the days.
|
On February 29 2012 07:10 JackDT wrote:
The chat thing does show that the combined volume of voices can get through to them. The half-assed chat is a lot better than no chat at all.
When Blizzard says they won't do LAN, I want the people asking them to follow up with asking why they don't put in a different solution for disconnects.
Yeah, but mind you: People asked for the chat the moment the Beta launched. About half a year later, when the game went live and a fraction of the millions of customers that had not experienced the Beta noticed that their game was missing elementary communication (and voiced their concerns on the forums, subsequently reaching the gaming media with their sheer numbers), we finally saw an update and chat being patched in.
We will never again see such an influx of user feedback or general unison among players. Neither with HotS nor with LotV. We lack the numbers to do so, we won't get them even with the addons, and the gaming media will be too busy praising the addons to notice that some things may be amiss.
|
That's partly why I think we should aim for low hanging fruit first -- the easiest stuff with the biggest impact. It shouldn't take as much of an uproar to get through to them if they aren't huge sweeping changes. I'm trying to think outside the box out of frustration here.
Most custom players, and every mapmaker, wants a waiting-for-players list. Maybe a campaign where mapmakers put an image or sentence in map splash screens, to show blizzard the overall demand. When every map has a splash screen that says, "Hey Blizzard, Battle.Net needs a waiting-for-players list" it is harder to ignore.
Every tournament wants to avoid problems with dropped games. TB openly complained during the Assembly finals about the lack of LAN. But that's a line in the sand they won't cross. Resuming-from-replay is a lot less to ask for. If multiple tournaments are telling Blizzard that they need some kind of solution here, and they aren't asking for LAN but for ANY solution, they might get through.
|
On February 29 2012 07:31 JackDT wrote:
That's partly why I think we should aim for low hanging fruit first -- the easiest stuff with the biggest impact. It shouldn't take as much of an uproar to get through to them if they aren't huge sweeping changes. I'm trying to think outside the box out of frustration here.
Most custom players, and every mapmaker, wants a waiting-for-players list. Maybe a campaign where mapmakers put an image or sentence in map splash screens, to show blizzard the overall demand. When every map has a splash screen that says, "Hey Blizzard, Battle.Net needs a waiting-for-players list" it is harder to ignore.
Every tournament wants to avoid problems with dropped games. TB openly complained during the Assembly finals about the lack of LAN. But that's a line in the sand they won't cross. Resuming-from-replay is a lot less to ask for. If multiple tournaments are telling Blizzard that they need some kind of solution here, and they aren't asking for LAN but for ANY solution, they might get through.
I think both issues should be adressed, but I cannot agree with the sentiment of "aiming for the low hanging fruit first".
We're not lobbying for some technical fixes here and there, but for a return to the previous level of quality and attention to games that has gone missing from Blizzard. This isn't about a bunch of oversights, or bugs, or issues not dealt with because of lacking funds or manpower. These are symptoms of a generally different approach to game design compared to the past.
Just asking for small fixes basically is asking to be ignored. Again: one single feature has been implemented in SC2 due to community pressure, and that was under circumstances we'll never see again. That's it. Unless you count map changes, where Blizzard is reacting to metagaming, balance and desire for variety at glacial speeds.
|
Was showering and just realized that something was not in the OP. How come that after you leave/disconnect a team game, that you cannot rejoin? It seems that it is viable given that it was done in LOL.
|
On February 29 2012 12:16 wunsun wrote:
Was showering and just realized that something was not in the OP. How come that after you leave/disconnect a team game, that you cannot rejoin? It seems that it is viable given that it was done in LOL.
And DotA 2, and HoN.
|
I really wish that you could initiate a chat with a player by double-clicking on their name in a chat channel or on your friends list. Pretty much the only thing that bugs me on a day-to-day basis when not in-game
|
Shockk I have to say this part in OP confuses me a bit, could you reiterate it a bit?
Chat. It still sucks. Simple commands like /w outside of games would make life tremendously easier. Real channels would be great. Or sending messages to my whole friends list. At the moment, any act of communication is a hassle; I either have to navigate through my friends list (which could be a lot more accessible too, by the way) to message people; I have to clumsily navigate through menus to send messages to other folks (or add them to my list); I even have to click through menus to ignore or report people.
What is real channels? How could the friends list be more accessible? You want to type in commands instead of right clicking on people's nicks to report or ignore them?
And there is no word about lack of moderation.
edit
Also from this picture: http://i.imgur.com/jEzkT.png I get and support everything except, I don't get the "unique names".
How names are not unique now? How are you supposed to add a friend to your friends list without the character code if he's not the only Shadow or Banepwnerer on the server?
|
The issue that really irks me is Blizzard so obviously has the capabilities to address these issues, yet neglects too... I'd really love to see a response from them. I'd honestly be elated if I were to come across any of these changes in the near future... with the thousands of posts on here and b.net, I hope to see some recognition of the communities complaints.
|
On February 29 2012 14:33 beetlelisk wrote:Shockk I have to say this part in OP confuses me a bit, could you reiterate it a bit? Show nested quote +Chat. It still sucks. Simple commands like /w outside of games would make life tremendously easier. Real channels would be great. Or sending messages to my whole friends list. At the moment, any act of communication is a hassle; I either have to navigate through my friends list (which could be a lot more accessible too, by the way) to message people; I have to clumsily navigate through menus to send messages to other folks (or add them to my list); I even have to click through menus to ignore or report people. What is real channels? How could the friends list be more accessible? You want to type in commands instead of right clicking on people's nicks to report or ignore them? And there is no word about lack of moderation.
A "real" chat interface would be the classic IRC-esque model; the whole chat would revolve around a dedicated chat window from which you'd join other channels or message whomever you wanted to. All features - add/remove friends, ignore/unignore, switch channel, moderation - would be accessible through chat commands. Channels would be permanent, so would moderation priviliges for private channels etc.
The friends list: It's too small. You could have 200 friends yet all you see are half a dozen at a time. You have to scroll through them, which becomes increasingly more tedious the more friends you have. There is no way to organize them into groups.
In the end, it's simply a hassle to chat in SC2 when it should be a smooth, integral feature of the game. Say you want to quickly message 5 different friends. /w 1 abc, /w 2 xyz, /w 3 hzg etc. All done from the same window, in a matter of seconds. Want to browse through their replies? Simple, just scroll through the window you're currently in. Want to quick-reply? No problem, /w + TAB will cycle through your conversation partners. But what do we have? To message 5 people, you need to open 5 windows, which will then annoyingly flash at you if there's an answer, and they'll litter your whole UI.
edit Also from this picture: http://i.imgur.com/jEzkT.png I get and support everything except, I don't get the "unique names". How names are not unique now? How are you supposed to add a friend to your friends list without the character code if he's not the only Shadow or Banepwnerer on the server?
Unique names means that there'd just be one beetlelisk on the whole realm. That's it. Someone messages beetlelisk? He's now talking to you. Pro: No need for character codes. And people can be added quickly through commands like /f a beetlelisk. Con: Someone else takes beetlelisk, it's gone, bad luck. But you have to go through the process of collecting character codes to add people.
Unique names worked well in SC/BW and War3 and in pretty much every other game too. Obviously popular choice names were gone quickly but everyone managed. But with Blizzard's new "Everyone's A Winner" policy, noone should be upset over anything at all, so everyone gets to pick the name he or she wants to.
|
On February 29 2012 05:58 JackDT wrote:
TL;DR -- Let's FOCUS FIRE on the most important issues with the least health...
The thing is - we "could" have it all, if Blizz would decide to just copy/paste all the things that were THERE in battle net 1.0 for warcraft 3 to begin with.
Yes, I can understand that stuff like tournaments are not that easy to implement. But they did it FROM SCRATCH for warcraft 3, how hard can it be to "transfer" the working system to starcraft 2? The warcraft 3 tournaments were so awsome because everyone started at "zero" - it was a true "everybody vs everybody" without seeds. After you won one game you would play vs another one with a single game won, and so on...so after you've gone, say, 5-0, chances are that you are suddenly matched against extremely good players as well. Since ladder was really hard in warcraft 3, those were my few shots at getting matched against pro-gamers on a regular basis. I loved the experience.
Also there was such a huge diversity. One tournament would be only on one map...one tournament would be only mirror-match-ups, etc. I mean, how funny would it be to have a tournament once a week where every match is played on a single ladder-map to determine the best player on this particular map, Bo1-style?
I think it really should be emphasized again and again that were are not asking for something new here. We are merely asking that Blizz brings stuff back that we had 10 years ago.
|
I won't be purchasing Heart of the Swarm unless it contains...
1) An updated chat system on Battle.net. I want more control over my friends list, private channels moderated by players, and other ease of use features.
2) Player named custom game lobbies. This can be in addition to the current system. Have the option to view what exists now or view player created and named lobbies.
3) A solution for disconnects and tournament play. I can understand no LAN, I cannot understand how disconnects and lag are so prevalent in major tournaments,
I hope others only purchase if Blizzard creates solutions to these issues.
|
|
|
i agree on the shared replay thin and also on the chat thing i don't really get it why they aren't able to introduce a decent chat system but other stuff is good but many people won't understand why.
For example that they don't give you stats on how many games you lose is a good idea by blizzard the goal is very simple - avoid that players get frustrated with the game. For a lot of people it is hard to lose and it can get very frustrating to get demoted or having a 50/50 win lose ratio when you think you are better than many of your enemys.(check ladder anxiety thread). I personally think they should make it even less judging and give you a few games(not too many) that aren't ranked but against people on your level, that would give people the opportunity to just play and actually have fun without worrying to much about their stats and points. This is also the reason why leagues don't mean anything, lots of players are happy when they finally get into diamond or masters and get a good rank there. Most people don't really care if they still don't know a thing about this game or are still godawful at this game as long as their rank is what they want to have.
I am pretty sure the general system won't change even tho i hope that the grandmaster system changes into something that actually has the top x players and not some random master players that grind out at the beginning of a new season.
Other stuff is questionable for example if i play teamgames with friends 4v4 or 3v3 we almost always get masters no matter what ranks my buddies have in 1v1. Our team a bit ago was 2gold 1 diamond 1master and we stomped the placement matches and were something like 14 in 1. Random teams usually don't have a chance at all, and we laugh and have fun in teamspeak while doing horrible builds and win anyway.
|
It's sad that I can get more statistics from CoD than I can from Sc2. Hopefully, Blizzard implements some of these awesome features in HoTS. I will not be holding my breath.
|
It's retarded people like that who make Blizzard think they are doing a great job.
|
On February 29 2012 20:24 TheSwamp wrote:It's retarded people like that who make Blizzard think they are doing a great job.
Read it again, that post is oozing with sarcasm. He has some comedy gold in there:
And of course there is piracy. I watched all three Pirates of the Carribean movies with my girlfriends in junior high, and if not having LAN keeps those kind of people away from playing this game, then I'm all for it. I feel much safer not having to play with pirates.
|
On February 29 2012 18:52 Shockk wrote:Show nested quote +On February 29 2012 14:33 beetlelisk wrote:Shockk I have to say this part in OP confuses me a bit, could you reiterate it a bit? Chat. It still sucks. Simple commands like /w outside of games would make life tremendously easier. Real channels would be great. Or sending messages to my whole friends list. At the moment, any act of communication is a hassle; I either have to navigate through my friends list (which could be a lot more accessible too, by the way) to message people; I have to clumsily navigate through menus to send messages to other folks (or add them to my list); I even have to click through menus to ignore or report people. What is real channels? How could the friends list be more accessible? You want to type in commands instead of right clicking on people's nicks to report or ignore them? And there is no word about lack of moderation. A "real" chat interface would be the classic IRC-esque model; the whole chat would revolve around a dedicated chat window from which you'd join other channels or message whomever you wanted to. All features - add/remove friends, ignore/unignore, switch channel, moderation - would be accessible through chat commands. Channels would be permanent, so would moderation priviliges for private channels etc. The friends list: It's too small. You could have 200 friends yet all you see are half a dozen at a time. You have to scroll through them, which becomes increasingly more tedious the more friends you have. There is no way to organize them into groups. In the end, it's simply a hassle to chat in SC2 when it should be a smooth, integral feature of the game. Say you want to quickly message 5 different friends. /w 1 abc, /w 2 xyz, /w 3 hzg etc. All done from the same window, in a matter of seconds. Want to browse through their replies? Simple, just scroll through the window you're currently in. Want to quick-reply? No problem, /w + TAB will cycle through your conversation partners. But what do we have? To message 5 people, you need to open 5 windows, which will then annoyingly flash at you if there's an answer, and they'll litter your whole UI.
I think you should paste this in the place of current "what is wrong with chat", it explains the problem much better.
The more clear it is the better.
Show nested quote +edit Also from this picture: http://i.imgur.com/jEzkT.png I get and support everything except, I don't get the "unique names". How names are not unique now? How are you supposed to add a friend to your friends list without the character code if he's not the only Shadow or Banepwnerer on the server? Unique names means that there'd just be one beetlelisk on the whole realm. That's it. Someone messages beetlelisk? He's now talking to you. Pro: No need for character codes. And people can be added quickly through commands like /f a beetlelisk. Con: Someone else takes beetlelisk, it's gone, bad luck. But you have to go through the process of collecting character codes to add people. Unique names worked well in SC/BW and War3 and in pretty much every other game too. Obviously popular choice names were gone quickly but everyone managed. But with Blizzard's new "Everyone's A Winner" policy, noone should be upset over anything at all, so everyone gets to pick the name he or she wants to.
There has to be a work around for /w to work, maybe choose a friend from friends list by default, with no need to attach his character code i.e. no /w beetlelisk#123. I have to say that I like being able to choose whichever nick I want.
And when adding a friend I typed in character code maybe once or twice so far. I'm always right clicking on the nickname and clicking "add friend".
On February 29 2012 20:24 TheSwamp wrote:It's retarded people like that who make Blizzard think they are doing a great job.
LOL maybe this thread is a joke, after reading it it's hard to believe the guy is serious.
btw lolol 1337th reply to this thread 
|
I really support all of this. It's such a pity that this kind of stuff isn't implemented, I think it would really aide in expanding the player base. I know that when people heard that SC2 was gonna have no LAN, many people said they wouldn't be able to play because they lived in places like Mali where the ping isn't good enough for online gaming.
Does anyone have any idea if they have even responded to any of these demands lately?
EDIT: Oh, and one thing, I think Blizzard should implement personal ladders for you to compare against your friends. It could be right under 'Match History' or something: "Personal Ladder." Make life easy for everyone.
|
On February 29 2012 22:18 CyDe wrote:
Does anyone have any idea if they have even responded to any of these demands lately?
No. Last SC2 related post where they promised something (if map pool changes, balance changes and interviews about possible HOTS features are not counted) was 21st of September 2011 when they promised to schedule implementation of paid name change feature. This declaration happened after strong community pressure. They targeted to start working with the feature either late 2011 or early 2012 and promised updates when they know more.
Post on US forums:
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/3229033487
The first quarter of 2012 has soon passed. They have not given updates regarding paid name change feature. They recently gave another free name change for those who had already changed their nick once. One could speculate that this means that the paid name change feature is not to expected soon. I guess this is one feature in their long list that they "would love to implement" but there is no schedule. And by giving another free name change they hope the community will forget what they promised in September.
(edit: fixed when they targeted to start implementing the feature (late 2010 or early 2011 ---> late 2011 or early 2012))
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
