We understand the requests, and have seen some of the creative suggestions, but we’re in the home stretch and aren’t looking to delay the release of the game further. Honestly speaking only a small portion of players will care if the chat channels are like they are, or if they’re more like the huge screen-dominating feature in D2. We have to apply value to the additional time it would take to address a small amount of requests for a change, and it just doesn’t outweigh releasing the game.
I think based on Battlenet 0.2 and D3's UI, it's safe to say that gone are the days of 'it will be released when it is released and not before.'
So they can rework the entire rune system of the game, pushing it back months, yet they can't rework Battle.net 2.0? smh
On April 25 2012 07:42 Falling wrote: Bashiok's post on Diablo 3 is interesting
We understand the requests, and have seen some of the creative suggestions, but we’re in the home stretch and aren’t looking to delay the release of the game further. Honestly speaking only a small portion of players will care if the chat channels are like they are, or if they’re more like the huge screen-dominating feature in D2. We have to apply value to the additional time it would take to address a small amount of requests for a change, and it just doesn’t outweigh releasing the game.
I think based on Battlenet 0.2 and D3's UI, it's safe to say that gone are the days of 'it will be released when it is released and not before.'
I really don't want to be the one to point this out, but Blizzard is sounding like fucking Activision right now. Shitting out games left and right. I'll be severely disappointed if HotS comes out late this year or early next year. Because I know that's way too fucking short of a development time for a game to have the Blizzard logo on it.
3 years for an expansion is not that short a period of time. They arent working off a new engine they are simply adding essentially new levels with a new race and new units.
On April 25 2012 07:42 Falling wrote: Bashiok's post on Diablo 3 is interesting
We understand the requests, and have seen some of the creative suggestions, but we’re in the home stretch and aren’t looking to delay the release of the game further. Honestly speaking only a small portion of players will care if the chat channels are like they are, or if they’re more like the huge screen-dominating feature in D2. We have to apply value to the additional time it would take to address a small amount of requests for a change, and it just doesn’t outweigh releasing the game.
I think based on Battlenet 0.2 and D3's UI, it's safe to say that gone are the days of 'it will be released when it is released and not before.'
I really don't want to be the one to point this out, but Blizzard is sounding like fucking Activision right now. Shitting out games left and right. I'll be severely disappointed if HotS comes out late this year or early next year. Because I know that's way too fucking short of a development time for a game to have the Blizzard logo on it.
3 years for an expansion is not that short a period of time. They arent working off a new engine they are simply adding essentially new levels with a new race and new units.
For a real time strategy game with online multiplayer being the reason for its popularity, balance of the game is the number one importance. New levels with a new race and new units is great and all, but if it's at the sacrifice of time that could have been spent on multiplayer balance, then I'd have to say that is a step in the wrong direction.
On April 25 2012 07:42 Falling wrote: Bashiok's post on Diablo 3 is interesting
We understand the requests, and have seen some of the creative suggestions, but we’re in the home stretch and aren’t looking to delay the release of the game further. Honestly speaking only a small portion of players will care if the chat channels are like they are, or if they’re more like the huge screen-dominating feature in D2. We have to apply value to the additional time it would take to address a small amount of requests for a change, and it just doesn’t outweigh releasing the game.
I think based on Battlenet 0.2 and D3's UI, it's safe to say that gone are the days of 'it will be released when it is released and not before.'
I really don't want to be the one to point this out, but Blizzard is sounding like fucking Activision right now. Shitting out games left and right. I'll be severely disappointed if HotS comes out late this year or early next year. Because I know that's way too fucking short of a development time for a game to have the Blizzard logo on it.
Don't worry. I'm sure they'll fix it when you buy HoTS. *wink wink, nudge nudge*
On April 24 2012 15:16 Chicane wrote: You guys are making me sad. Some of my personal favorites (though you can argue they weren't all actually good games) were Sheep tag, Freeze Tag, Wintermaul/WMW, Cube TD, Gem TD and Elimination Tournament (which has a place in my heart XD). I could keep listing them, but there isn't much of a point. Thanks for the nostalgic thoughts though. :D
I haven't posted in this thread before now, but OMG Sheep Tag brings back so many memories! I used to play it so much, such a great UMS.
On April 24 2012 15:16 Chicane wrote: You guys are making me sad. Some of my personal favorites (though you can argue they weren't all actually good games) were Sheep tag, Freeze Tag, Wintermaul/WMW, Cube TD, Gem TD and Elimination Tournament (which has a place in my heart XD). I could keep listing them, but there isn't much of a point. Thanks for the nostalgic thoughts though. :D
I haven't posted in this thread before now, but OMG Sheep Tag brings back so many memories! I used to play it so much, such a great UMS.
It's a shame, isn't it. I played a lot of Gem TD and that DotA clone with tanks; I'd have stopped playing War3 a long sooner if it hadn't been for those maps. And they weren't even the most creative maps the community came up with.
On April 24 2012 15:16 Chicane wrote: You guys are making me sad. Some of my personal favorites (though you can argue they weren't all actually good games) were Sheep tag, Freeze Tag, Wintermaul/WMW, Cube TD, Gem TD and Elimination Tournament (which has a place in my heart XD). I could keep listing them, but there isn't much of a point. Thanks for the nostalgic thoughts though. :D
I haven't posted in this thread before now, but OMG Sheep Tag brings back so many memories! I used to play it so much, such a great UMS.
Thought I was the only one!!! Thank fuck. Sheep tag was my favorite. I was in the best sheep tag clan in EU (arguably). Running around on the green sheep tag fields, blocking wolves and saving partners and owning it up...sigh. Makes me sad to remember...
On April 25 2012 07:42 Falling wrote: Bashiok's post on Diablo 3 is interesting
We understand the requests, and have seen some of the creative suggestions, but we’re in the home stretch and aren’t looking to delay the release of the game further. Honestly speaking only a small portion of players will care if the chat channels are like they are, or if they’re more like the huge screen-dominating feature in D2. We have to apply value to the additional time it would take to address a small amount of requests for a change, and it just doesn’t outweigh releasing the game.
I think based on Battlenet 0.2 and D3's UI, it's safe to say that gone are the days of 'it will be released when it is released and not before.'
I really don't want to be the one to point this out, but Blizzard is sounding like fucking Activision right now. Shitting out games left and right. I'll be severely disappointed if HotS comes out late this year or early next year. Because I know that's way too fucking short of a development time for a game to have the Blizzard logo on it.
Shitting out games left and right? I think Blizzard is having a very long toilet visit then. Diablo 3, 5 years. HotS will probably be 2 years/2,5 years when it's released. WoW expansions are the only exception. Time is really not the problem here. It's more not having the right people for the job working on Battle.net. It's pretty telling how many open positions there still are.
On April 25 2012 07:42 Falling wrote: Bashiok's post on Diablo 3 is interesting
We understand the requests, and have seen some of the creative suggestions, but we’re in the home stretch and aren’t looking to delay the release of the game further. Honestly speaking only a small portion of players will care if the chat channels are like they are, or if they’re more like the huge screen-dominating feature in D2. We have to apply value to the additional time it would take to address a small amount of requests for a change, and it just doesn’t outweigh releasing the game.
I think based on Battlenet 0.2 and D3's UI, it's safe to say that gone are the days of 'it will be released when it is released and not before.'
I really don't want to be the one to point this out, but Blizzard is sounding like fucking Activision right now. Shitting out games left and right. I'll be severely disappointed if HotS comes out late this year or early next year. Because I know that's way too fucking short of a development time for a game to have the Blizzard logo on it.
Shitting out games left and right? I think Blizzard is having a very long toilet visit then. Diablo 3, 5 years. HotS will probably be 2 years/2,5 years when it's released. WoW expansions are the only exception. Time is really not the problem here. It's more not having the right people for the job working on Battle.net. It's pretty telling how many open positions there still are.
Agree with you here man. If Blizz shat out games any slower, they'd go out of business
(Also, I wonder why Blizz would be like Activision??? ... hmmmmmmmmmmmmm)
On April 25 2012 07:42 Falling wrote: Bashiok's post on Diablo 3 is interesting
We understand the requests, and have seen some of the creative suggestions, but we’re in the home stretch and aren’t looking to delay the release of the game further. Honestly speaking only a small portion of players will care if the chat channels are like they are, or if they’re more like the huge screen-dominating feature in D2. We have to apply value to the additional time it would take to address a small amount of requests for a change, and it just doesn’t outweigh releasing the game.
I think based on Battlenet 0.2 and D3's UI, it's safe to say that gone are the days of 'it will be released when it is released and not before.'
I really don't want to be the one to point this out, but Blizzard is sounding like fucking Activision right now. Shitting out games left and right. I'll be severely disappointed if HotS comes out late this year or early next year. Because I know that's way too fucking short of a development time for a game to have the Blizzard logo on it.
3 years for an expansion is not that short a period of time. They arent working off a new engine they are simply adding essentially new levels with a new race and new units.
For a real time strategy game with online multiplayer being the reason for its popularity, balance of the game is the number one importance. New levels with a new race and new units is great and all, but if it's at the sacrifice of time that could have been spent on multiplayer balance, then I'd have to say that is a step in the wrong direction.
Okay, ID like to give my 2 cents here.
Ballance, level design, campaigns, GUI etc.. yes that's a lot of work. All changes for the better take a lot of time to improve.
But everything that is sucking on BNET 2.0 is not because of a "development crunch-time" where they had to cut corners to ship the game early.
The GUI problems and the missing features is a policy issue. Decisions made by top management, and not the programmers themselves. Somebody somewhere made a decision that a dumbed-down interface is a good idea and the programmers just did their best with what they were told.
Somebody with decision making powers in the company probably was tasked to streamline the already great WC3 Bnet and "make it better". Remember the fuss about how revolutionary Bnet 2.0 would be before the game was released? They actually thought that they were doing a great job!
The goal probably was to make an interface that would have you just clicking "Quick Match" all day long. And if that's the case, they succeeded massively!
So, everything that sucks in Bnet 2.0 is deliberate IMO!
LAN? Yeah, same thing. Early builds of the game probably had LAN in it for internal development purposes. I mean, they could not have developed the game servers before the game engine itself. Especially because they developed it from the WC3 engine and not from scratch. They improved the W3 engine, made improved campaign development tools and after that made a Bnet server that can handle it. When the server code was there, LAN was just an "optional" feature.
Somewhere along the line, the decision to take out LAN was made and it was scrapped. Along with all the other features.
Hell, look at how they split the campaigns into 3 games!
I bet at least alpha-quality code and art for all the features that we are asking for are saved somewhere and are deliberately being withheld for D3, HOTS, BDOTA, D3-EXP and LOTV. Cutting features to "release the game sooner" is an excuse. I bet it's a spiel for the BNET forum mods.
Blizzard has one of the best programming teams in gaming today. It's the decision makers that suck.
And who are the decision makers? Activision! Not the original Blizzard of old. Essentially instead of releasing the "Best SC2 Possible", we will be getting SC2, SC3 (AKA HOTS) and SC4 (AKA LOTV) Activision sequel style (Call of Duty) for about every 2 years.
I would not be surprised if after LOTV there would be more sequels, milking the franchise for what it's worth.
I wish Valve would develop a 3-race RTS so Activision-Blizzard would have some competition and step their game up!
It's not a matter of talent or time, Blizzard has a lot of both.
They have intentionally decided that an overly streamlined, sterile, non-social experinece is what they want. They didn't want to include chat channels period if you originally recall and then every "mistake" made with SC2 they repeated in D3, even worse actually.
By all accounts D3 is an even more community focused based game, I mean it's a co-op game, and it feels the exact same as a single player game for the most part.
I can only speculate as to the why behind these ridiculous design decision. My own personal conspiracy theory? They don't want people spending a lot of time playing SC2 or D3, they want you on WoW (or Titan or any other pay to play game).
For their box sale games they want people to sign on, play a few games for kicks, then go back to their pay to play game. If they made D3 or SC2 too social or fun, people might just spend all their gaming time there and desub.
On April 25 2012 07:42 Falling wrote: Bashiok's post on Diablo 3 is interesting
We understand the requests, and have seen some of the creative suggestions, but we’re in the home stretch and aren’t looking to delay the release of the game further. Honestly speaking only a small portion of players will care if the chat channels are like they are, or if they’re more like the huge screen-dominating feature in D2. We have to apply value to the additional time it would take to address a small amount of requests for a change, and it just doesn’t outweigh releasing the game.
I think based on Battlenet 0.2 and D3's UI, it's safe to say that gone are the days of 'it will be released when it is released and not before.'
I really don't want to be the one to point this out, but Blizzard is sounding like fucking Activision right now. Shitting out games left and right. I'll be severely disappointed if HotS comes out late this year or early next year. Because I know that's way too fucking short of a development time for a game to have the Blizzard logo on it.
3 years for an expansion is not that short a period of time. They arent working off a new engine they are simply adding essentially new levels with a new race and new units.
For a real time strategy game with online multiplayer being the reason for its popularity, balance of the game is the number one importance. New levels with a new race and new units is great and all, but if it's at the sacrifice of time that could have been spent on multiplayer balance, then I'd have to say that is a step in the wrong direction.
I'm pretty sure that the people responsible for balance are not the ones creating new units etc. (Although they might have the ideas they won't be the ones actually spending time making them).
Also, gameplay is just as important as balance. If the game isn't at all satisfying to play or watch no-one will want to play it. I'd rather have some slight imbalances that can be resolved later with awesome gameplay than a predictable/boring/stale game.
On topic: I really hope that the Blizzard announcement about improvements to the UI only contained a very small fraction of what they have planned.
On April 25 2012 07:42 Falling wrote: Bashiok's post on Diablo 3 is interesting
We understand the requests, and have seen some of the creative suggestions, but we’re in the home stretch and aren’t looking to delay the release of the game further. Honestly speaking only a small portion of players will care if the chat channels are like they are, or if they’re more like the huge screen-dominating feature in D2. We have to apply value to the additional time it would take to address a small amount of requests for a change, and it just doesn’t outweigh releasing the game.
I think based on Battlenet 0.2 and D3's UI, it's safe to say that gone are the days of 'it will be released when it is released and not before.'
So they can rework the entire rune system of the game, pushing it back months, yet they can't rework Battle.net 2.0? smh
New developer diary for D3 was released some days ago. One thing that ruffles my feathers is that in it the D3 developers claim all the time that the game had to be 'Blizzard quality' before release. But if the beta is to believed it must have not been a requirement for the Battle.net interface. Question is: Is the quality of the product good if part of it is potentially great (the game) and part of it subpar (the supporting service - Bnet). - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjYRVbjq1eg］ [/url]
A columnist for diablo.incgamers.com had had a conversation with Bashiok recently at PAX East. The columnist had learned that "In terms of post release support, there will NOT be any content updates aside from PVP post release. They will still make balance adjustments and bug fixes, but new dungeons, quests, and such will not happen. This is because Diablo 3 is a single box product and will be supported similarly to Diablo 2." - http://diablo.incgamers.com/blog/comments/exclusive-new-info-on-pvp-beta-content-and-d3-patches
This may mean that Blizzard has no plans to improve Battle.net UI features for D3, which seem even worse than SC2's according to the beta. If this speculation is true, it does not look promising regarding future of Bnet UI improvements for SC2 either.
(edit: added one more sentence to first paragraph)
quoted from a Gamesplanet interview with Jay Wilson:
Gameplanet: So that brings up a couple of things: what goals, or what benchmarks do you personally hold that will need to be met in order to qualify this game as a success?
Wilson: ... So for me, if a community builds around it similar to the community that built around Diablo II, then I will feel like it’s a success. If that community is vibrant and wars with each other, and with us, and struggles and fights to make the game better, then to me that's worth continuing to work on the game. That’s success.
Gameplanet: Cool. Going onto Battle.net: there’s the real-money auction house, but what other features would you like to see implemented?
Wilson: Our plan for Battle.net has always been to turn it into something more of a social network than just a platform for starting games. I don’t think it’s there yet, I don’t think it’s even close. I think you can look at it – we’ve got a lot of criticism from people saying that in a lot of ways it’s not even as good as Diablo II. While I would put forward things like cross-game chat and the quick-join capabilities, match-making – things that just didn’t exist in Diablo II, things that I think are more powerful than what you had – but I don’t think they’re wrong.
I think there are some things that we could be better at. We could be better at getting players into chat channels together, we could be better at allowing people to show gear off to one another. So those are problems that I do think we need to look at and continue to solve, but I [also] think that’s the great thing about working at Blizzard. As I said earlier, I don’t have to look at this game as being done, I can say, “Yeah, those are good points, those are things we should make better.”
Not sure what to think of it. The two pages long article has some news to the d3 stuff, why Blizzard loves the PC, the difference in maintaining games compared to other companies and about b.net. But well, i am not sure how much of this is truth and what is nothing more than hot air. But overall an interesting interview imo.
On April 25 2012 07:42 Falling wrote: Bashiok's post on Diablo 3 is interesting
We understand the requests, and have seen some of the creative suggestions, but we’re in the home stretch and aren’t looking to delay the release of the game further. Honestly speaking only a small portion of players will care if the chat channels are like they are, or if they’re more like the huge screen-dominating feature in D2. We have to apply value to the additional time it would take to address a small amount of requests for a change, and it just doesn’t outweigh releasing the game.
I think based on Battlenet 0.2 and D3's UI, it's safe to say that gone are the days of 'it will be released when it is released and not before.'
I really don't want to be the one to point this out, but Blizzard is sounding like fucking Activision right now. Shitting out games left and right. I'll be severely disappointed if HotS comes out late this year or early next year. Because I know that's way too fucking short of a development time for a game to have the Blizzard logo on it.
3 years for an expansion is not that short a period of time. They arent working off a new engine they are simply adding essentially new levels with a new race and new units.
For a real time strategy game with online multiplayer being the reason for its popularity, balance of the game is the number one importance. New levels with a new race and new units is great and all, but if it's at the sacrifice of time that could have been spent on multiplayer balance, then I'd have to say that is a step in the wrong direction.
[...]
And who are the decision makers? Activision! Not the original Blizzard of old. Essentially instead of releasing the "Best SC2 Possible", we will be getting SC2, SC3 (AKA HOTS) and SC4 (AKA LOTV) Activision sequel style (Call of Duty) for about every 2 years.
I would not be surprised if after LOTV there would be more sequels, milking the franchise for what it's worth.
I wish Valve would develop a 3-race RTS so Activision-Blizzard would have some competition and step their game up!
I don't understand why there are still debates about this when the very CEO of the company producing Starcraft has publicly stated that he's only interested in IPs that he can "exploit on a yearly basis." What else did you expect to happen?
About the Valve thing, I don't see this happening anytime soon. At best, a popular Dota2 mod might emerge and get picked by them later, but the community has to act first.
Now that Blizz devs have outlined the features to be implemented in HotS, it saddens me to see that a UI revamp (and better chat channels) was NOT one of those features. sad face
On May 08 2012 10:53 DarkStrikeX wrote: Now that Blizz devs have outlined the features to be implemented in HotS, it saddens me to see that a UI revamp (and better chat channels) was NOT one of those features. sad face
Because those features trump whatever UI changes there will be and I know there will be changes to the UI but it is not worth mentioning really...
EPT
Some of my personal favorites (though you can argue they weren't all actually good games) were Sheep tag, Freeze Tag, Wintermaul/WMW, Cube TD, Gem TD and Elimination Tournament (which has a place in my heart XD). I could keep listing them, but there isn't much of a point. Thanks for the nostalgic thoughts though. :D
