|
Canada13389 Posts
On February 07 2012 18:53 Telcontar wrote:
O Blizzard, Where Art Thou? T_______T
Seriously, it feels to me like the people they paid to make the UI i dont know how long ago made it so that to implement the features we want means rewriting the whole thing. IDK whats up but apparently Blizzard has stopped caring about the people and more about the product.
I know this sounds weird but hear me out: they are so focused on making a specific experience gameplaywise that they just completely ignore what people truly love about blizzard: the multiplayer. The few things that they are applying seem to be learned from their experience in WoW which is a completely different kind of game from D3 and SC2. Both of which require some form of individualized chat system and multiplayer functions.
Guild chats for D3, SC2 with moderation support chats, clan tags in both games. Better custom matchmaking system in SC2.
They seem to want to streamline the games for the masses but what they fail to realise is that short of WoW, their games have always been massive successes with a relatively small dedicated long term fan base (relative to the boom of when the game is fresh and new). While the way they are setting up Bnet 2.0 is good for the immediate new people and mass market it really starts to degrade over time when the people playing the game have committed to it and the player pool slowly shrinks over time.
For D3 this is the people who played the single player but never went to hell, followed by those who wanted to run the game in groups and with an eye on top end loot for their own satisfaction. SC/BW single player campaign has at least been attempted by a lot of people but played online by much much fewer and those who strove to learn the game fewer still. I can't tell you how many people I know that played SC2 single player campaign but eventually stopped because they didn't like the RTS genre too much. The number of people who got SC2 beta keys when preordering but never actually playing more than 10 games or a couple hours online before release. Some of us truly love and enjoy these games and over time the UI for connecting to others who love these games is what will help sustain the community. I would love to join a low level clan just for practice, it would be nice to have chats not full of complete idiots who spam crap.
I would really really also like to be able to choose a matchup and map and then play that on ladder without having to create a preset time to play with a friend. But sadly this isnt going to be happening any time soon. The UI is fine for those who log on here and there or who first get the game and put some 10 hours in. Beyond these people though it becomes really problematic for the rest of us 
|
"Anything that isn't perfect?"
There simply were NO chat channels after the release of SC2.
How this could ever fly is beyond me....
See... Back in SC/BW and later in WC3 pressing "enter chat" sent you in your nation specific channel.. Over 10 years ago, we had this nice little community in Switzerland which went out to meet each other several times a year.. Just to chat, drink and have fun together.
Now? I still know the same people i knew from WC3 and SC/BW... New players? Maybe a handfull.
No Public Chat just means one thing ---> No ingame community.
Back in the day you did not need to post in a Forum to be part of "the community", you could do that online... Now?... Either you allready have to kno to people from somewhere or you have to search your guys outside the game...
It's just sad.
All of this would be kinda "ok".. IF bnet2.0 was not supposed to be better than Bnet1.0... Which it just plain isn't.. It's a failure.
|
Yes, the UI and Chatsystem is not very good, but that's not the point for me to buy a game when the game itself, the story und multiplayer experience is awesome....
|
On February 07 2012 22:56 Zeroxk wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 22:06 Noobity wrote:
Now, I read the other thread as well, and I sincerely think a lot of this is blown out of proportion.
I'm not saying that there's nothing Blizzard can do that would make things better, and I'm also not saying that some of the decisions they made originally were silly, but this doom and gloom that we're seeing all over the place is a little much. The important thing about a Blizzard game is the game, this is where they shine. They make high quality games, that take forever to come out, but have constant support.
Now I've been playing Blizzard games multiplayer since the original war2, this meant I needed to use my 56k modem to dial into my buddy's 56k modem and use the mouse to charade my way through words with him before the games began to plan our strategy against the impossible AI. It's entirely possible that I'm just happy we're not still in that era.
Frankly, if they never improve the UI it wont stop me from playing sc2 or any other blizzard games, and I get the feeling that I'm in the majority here (no, a thread on a forum with a few thousand posts does not equate a majority). I would much rather they devote money to a development team specifically for their games than their community. I prefer this current system to what war2/d1/d2/sc1 had, and while I'd probably prefer the war3 system, I'll take what I can get.
One thing you can't say about sBlizzard is that they don't try new things, as every single incarnation of BNET UI since it's inception has been pretty drastically different. Sometimes this means you've got a time where they try something that doesn't work out and are determined to give it their best shot before scrapping it for the more tried and true.
All I'm saying is that while this system is not yet perfect, it's not abysmal either. I agree, this community is extremely entitled and anything that isn't "perfect" to them is "awful". All the features that everyone is clamoring for regarding b.net are not must-haves, but nice-to-have (note that LAN is excepted from this)
Also write down word "nostalgia" to your dictionary, it will help you with further endeavors.
Nice to have, my god, is the bar set so low nowadays?So that people cannot demand what they were promised to get? They paid a fucking bucks for it.
|
On February 07 2012 23:10 bgx wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 22:56 Zeroxk wrote:On February 07 2012 22:06 Noobity wrote:
Now, I read the other thread as well, and I sincerely think a lot of this is blown out of proportion.
I'm not saying that there's nothing Blizzard can do that would make things better, and I'm also not saying that some of the decisions they made originally were silly, but this doom and gloom that we're seeing all over the place is a little much. The important thing about a Blizzard game is the game, this is where they shine. They make high quality games, that take forever to come out, but have constant support.
Now I've been playing Blizzard games multiplayer since the original war2, this meant I needed to use my 56k modem to dial into my buddy's 56k modem and use the mouse to charade my way through words with him before the games began to plan our strategy against the impossible AI. It's entirely possible that I'm just happy we're not still in that era.
Frankly, if they never improve the UI it wont stop me from playing sc2 or any other blizzard games, and I get the feeling that I'm in the majority here (no, a thread on a forum with a few thousand posts does not equate a majority). I would much rather they devote money to a development team specifically for their games than their community. I prefer this current system to what war2/d1/d2/sc1 had, and while I'd probably prefer the war3 system, I'll take what I can get.
One thing you can't say about sBlizzard is that they don't try new things, as every single incarnation of BNET UI since it's inception has been pretty drastically different. Sometimes this means you've got a time where they try something that doesn't work out and are determined to give it their best shot before scrapping it for the more tried and true.
All I'm saying is that while this system is not yet perfect, it's not abysmal either. I agree, this community is extremely entitled and anything that isn't "perfect" to them is "awful". All the features that everyone is clamoring for regarding b.net are not must-haves, but nice-to-have (note that LAN is excepted from this) Also write down word "nostalgia" to your dictionary, it will help you with further endeavors. Nice to have, my god, is the bar set so low nowadays?So that people cannot demand what they were promised to get? They paid a fucking bucks for it.
What were people promised to get?
|
hehe i guess most people are still to used to bnet and now there is this bnet 0.2 and they actually have to go back to the old ways, ugh so much work starting another program. I don't mind Blizzard experimenting around, they always did it. And since they scrapped the whole bnet2 and just did an emergency build to have atleast something for the release, i really don't mind that its not as good as the old bnet. Or that some find it hard that random people custom games are hard to get started.
I knew when they said they scrapped it that it will be horrible with WoL, so atleast i will wait for HotS and see for myself if they improved it or if they stick with their icq system.
I am using icq and irc systems so i have bnet 0.2 and bnet 1.0 without being logged into a blizzard game yay.
Well if Blizzard starts making bad games in a row you can drop them. But for an one year old chat system. If everyone would be like this valve would not have made it past the first month with their steam xD. I'll give Blizzard some time to improve their new bnet, just like i gave em time with their old bnet
|
What makes me rage about this topic is the fact that everybody knows how bad the UI is, how way better was BW and TFT UIs... and after all Blizzard says "SC2 UI is ok, if it wasn't we would have a lot of complains, we always listen the community".
God, even WOWs chat system is way better (and WOWs chat system is really really really basic).
|
On February 07 2012 23:25 azka wrote:
What makes me rage about this topic is the fact that everybody knows how bad the UI is, how way better was BW and TFT UIs... and after all Blizzard says "SC2 UI is ok, if it wasn't we would have a lot of complains, we always listen the community".
And when did they say this?
What some people fail to see is that what's true for SC2 isn't necessarily so for D3. In D2 the primary way of meeting new people was in-game. You joined up with some guys and played though an act or two, or did some Baal runs. The envronment was entirely different to SC2 where the competitive nature of it gives no time for chatting away or socializing while playing. D2 do and so does D3. Despite being involved in many groups and in-game communities in D2 over the years, I can count those I've met and stayed in contact with through public channels on my testicles.
Point is, public channels serves a different purpose in SC2 than in D3.
|
I have three other chat services and a clan ventrilo server for voice chat so I don't use the in game chat for anything than messaging specific people.
That said, how are the current chat channels handled in a way that's unsatisfactory? I don't think anyone wants a global chat channel for HoTS so what DO people want that isn't there?
|
On February 07 2012 23:38 Longshank wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 23:25 azka wrote:
What makes me rage about this topic is the fact that everybody knows how bad the UI is, how way better was BW and TFT UIs... and after all Blizzard says "SC2 UI is ok, if it wasn't we would have a lot of complains, we always listen the community". And when did they say this? What some people fail to see is that what's true for SC2 isn't necessarily so for D3. In D2 the primary way of meeting new people was in-game. You joined up with some guys and played though an act or two, or did some Baal runs. The envronment was entirely different to SC2 where the competitive nature of it gives no time for chatting away or socializing while playing. D2 do and so does D3. Despite being involved in many groups and in-game communities in D2 over the years, I can count those I've met and stayed in contact with through public channels on my testicles. Point is, public channels serves a different purpose in SC2 than in D3.
Its not the matter how you choose to use the tools you got, its the problem of the lack of them. Having an option to meet someone is better than not having it. If there was no need to have social meetings in BW/D2/WC3 there would be no outcry from the community now. If there is an outcry from community it means there were siginificant ammount of people with different expectations or different experience than you. It is simple as that. With option of social chats there still would an option for you to stay out of community just by not entering them, so in fact people with no business in socialising should be neutral to this.
You really cant blame customers for projecting their needs.
|
On February 07 2012 20:23 Longshank wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 20:08 Orracle wrote:On February 07 2012 19:58 Longshank wrote:
Anyone who's played D2 ever would know that the chat system and public channels there were atrocious. It was so incredibly bad that it's mind-boggling that people are actually whining when they decides to improve upon it for D3. Seriously some of you whinge just for the sake of it. First off, Trading and PKing were essentially what D2 became about. Trading channels, like Lod Ladder Trading USWest-1, etc were still used, even when bots flooded it. Second off, Blizzard has revamped their account system. So if a person really wants to run a spam bot for a couple days before it's banned and has to shell out $60, so be it. There is no improvement involved. It's stripping a system that worked just fine, into next to nothing. The trading channels didn't work 'fine'. They existed solely because it was the only way to trade, an issue which is now fixed in D3. I know for certain that I won't miss getting thrown into LoD SWE -1 when logging in, and that's not due to any bots. No tears will be shed. The community made channels were the only ones usable for people above the age of 13. Those public channels would be hell to moderate and I can't blame Blizzard for having better things to do than to babysit them.
So to you a feasible solution of trading is to create a real money auction house and ignore creating any public channels?
Blizzard has no reason to babysit these public channels, similar to D2. If a player doesn't like them, they can leave them. But apparently a large majority of people really do like these channels, and that's much more important than a small percentage who don't.
|
On February 07 2012 22:23 PatouPower wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 18:47 Orracle wrote:
I'm not sure why in the hell they screw up a system that has been around so long and has so much positive feedback.
People have spoke about how they prefer the older chat style, and with a fresh game such as D3, I see no reason why they would ignore it.
I for one will not be buying HOTS until they start listening to customer feedback. The thing is, if customers keep buying their products, even with an awful interface, I see no reason why they should bother changing. Did you only buy SC2 to have a 60$ msn messenger or a downgraded skype? People play SC2 and will buy HOTS because there is a game behind the chat system, and believe it or not, most of the money you spend on the game goes towards that (and not the chat channels). A lot of people just want to log on and mass games on ladder without socializing 1 hour between each game. If you really need that social aspects, free softwares like skype/ventrilo/teamspeak are out there and they are far better than anything you need as a clan/team/group of friends. Yes, the SC2 chat system sucks, but you don't boycott a game for a really minor feature. There are other reasons for you to boycott it, but don't put it on the UI.
I'm going to assume this is your first Blizzard game. If you knew anything about BW, there are many features this game is lacking: chat UI, features, custom games, etc. Which is ok, initially. The problem becomes when they ignore their customers who have been asking for this over and over. Hell, there wasn't even a chat system when this game was released, which just boggles my mind with corners they're cutting to make a profit.
Know what's great about a capitalistic society? Companies can do what they want. So if Blizzard wants to neglect customer feedback, I am 100% free to go play Dota 2, LOL, or whatever game I prefer.
|
On February 07 2012 18:46 Honga wrote:
Too many Xbox developers make me sad. When will game companies stop going backwards and realise people do not want console games on their PC. PC is a better platform for a more intricate game, and as such that's what everyone wants.
TBH too much money is put into graphics/story development, to me this is all just fluff.
I disagree that story development is fluff. Graphics sure, although good graphics are pretty necessary, but story development in a game is pretty crucial.
|
On February 08 2012 02:59 Orracle wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 20:23 Longshank wrote:On February 07 2012 20:08 Orracle wrote:On February 07 2012 19:58 Longshank wrote:
Anyone who's played D2 ever would know that the chat system and public channels there were atrocious. It was so incredibly bad that it's mind-boggling that people are actually whining when they decides to improve upon it for D3. Seriously some of you whinge just for the sake of it. First off, Trading and PKing were essentially what D2 became about. Trading channels, like Lod Ladder Trading USWest-1, etc were still used, even when bots flooded it. Second off, Blizzard has revamped their account system. So if a person really wants to run a spam bot for a couple days before it's banned and has to shell out $60, so be it. There is no improvement involved. It's stripping a system that worked just fine, into next to nothing. The trading channels didn't work 'fine'. They existed solely because it was the only way to trade, an issue which is now fixed in D3. I know for certain that I won't miss getting thrown into LoD SWE -1 when logging in, and that's not due to any bots. No tears will be shed. The community made channels were the only ones usable for people above the age of 13. Those public channels would be hell to moderate and I can't blame Blizzard for having better things to do than to babysit them. So to you a feasible solution of trading is to create a real money auction house and ignore creating any public channels? Blizzard has no reason to babysit these public channels, similar to D2. If a player doesn't like them, they can leave them. But apparently a large majority of people really do like these channels, and that's much more important than a small percentage who don't.
First off, yes that sounds like a fine solution to me. It's also only real money auction house if you choose it to be.
Secondly, you can email Blizzard and tell them to forward all reports of threats and harassment to you then. Shouldn't be a biggie to follow up on them eh, I bet everyone play nice in these public channels!
Third, I've seen no evidence what so ever that a majority of the player base liked the D2 chat system better than what's suggested for D3. I know however that a majority of those I've played with over at diabloii.net thought that the channel system in D2 sucked major donkey balls, and it truly did. Please provide evidence for such claim because I have a hard time believing it.
edit: this is getting very far from SC2.
|
Haha, battle.net 0.2 seems like a sadly appropriate version number.
TBH, tho, my main complaint with BNET 2.0 is the custom maps list / popularity system for custom games. The effects of this system on mod development and play has been absolutely stifling.
|
I have a slight problem. I don't want people finding out my real name, but I want them to know how long I've been logged off for, or what type of game (ladder or custom) I am in...
|
we just want the battle.net 1.0 system just like in wc3!
|
Everyone knows you'll buy the game chat or no chat.
|
Calgary25990 Posts
I'm sorry I thought this was 2012, not 1996. COME ON/
|
On February 07 2012 19:07 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 18:52 ZenDeX wrote:Bashiok wrote:
As far as having open public channels, there’s far more negative to them than positive and we maintain a stance that creating an open chat environment without a social structure behind it is an invitation for moderation and support disasters. What a lazy excuse.. This confirms how the current staff at Blizz values their customers less. Or... how many complaints they got about the un-moderated chat channels that have existed in the past. Either way, even the most optimistic of players can't deny that there's a lot of truth to what Bashiok said, the difference is that these players get more enjoyment out of the chat channels than anyone at blizz would who would have to moderate them.
This logic also presupposes it's the job of a company to nanny you through the internet by moderating chat rooms. Probably somebody has complained to Blizzard in the past (I wouldn't bet it was very many people). Emailing Blizzard about what happened in an unmoderated chat that you joined makes about as much sense to me as emailing them complaining that someone beat you in a ladder game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
