|
On February 07 2012 23:13 Longshank wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 23:10 bgx wrote: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?
I believe Blizzard told us Battle.net 2.0 was going to be so good that people wouldn't want to play on LAN.
|
On February 08 2012 06:36 iamke55 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 23:13 Longshank wrote:On February 07 2012 23:10 bgx wrote: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? I believe Blizzard told us Battle.net 2.0 was going to be so good that people wouldn't want to play on LAN.
I'm able to empathize with them on the changes they decided on (no public channels to cut costs on moderating, no LAN to fight piracy, etc) on every point except the custom game list. It blows my mind every time I look at it and have to say "no, no more mafia." Their galaxy editor is so good and yet no one gets to know that because for some reason the only popular maps are ones Battle.net users have been used to for the past decade.
|
Pardon my ignorance, but why is chat so important to you guys? There's already TL, Reddit, and Skype/Teamspeak. Would you really be spending that much time on chat?
|
I'm completely fine with anything they change to the chat system; i dont care at all about chat related things in sc2 or D3. If I want to have an effective chat session opened with someone in order to play the game together, then I will use Skype.
Does anyone even use the blizzard public channels in sc2 anymore? I see like 10 people average in General chat, and 100 at all times in the TL "private" channel lol.
|
Calgary25987 Posts
On February 08 2012 06:46 AndAgain wrote:
Pardon my ignorance, but why is chat so important to you guys? There's already TL, Reddit, and Skype/Teamspeak. Would you really be spending that much time on chat?
I can't explain it, but in BW I would idle in channel and chat away. I would join random games that got created from the chat channel just to observe.
SC2 is pure business.
Log on, play, log off, talk to no one. That was my experience anyways.
|
On February 07 2012 18:39 Gurgl wrote:
Can Blizzard do whatever they want and we'll still buy and play their games?
....yes. Chat and such are just side features, as long as the game is starcraft and lives up to its name, there can be no chat and I will still buy it a hundred times over.
|
hehe public chat is so important because its missing, its something useless to rant about, because it won't come back for sure, so you can keep on ranting about it. And you forgot irc, basically a chat system so good that its useless to program one for a game alone as there is already something that works out there. So an icq like system is almost totally fine, like steam already has.
|
On February 08 2012 06:48 ishyishy wrote:
I'm completely fine with anything they change to the chat system; i dont care at all about chat related things in sc2 or D3. If I want to have an effective chat session opened with someone in order to play the game together, then I will use Skype.
Does anyone even use the blizzard public channels in sc2 anymore? I see like 10 people average in General chat, and 100 at all times in the TL "private" channel lol.
People were asking generally for the old chat, where when you log into Battle.net it dumps you into the same chat room as everyone else. I can certainly understand that. It forced you to realize there were thousands of other people "right there", you weren't alone. Now when you log onto Battle.net 2.0 you certainly are far more isolated.
I don't claim to need that old chat system, but I did kind've preferred it to what we have now.
|
On February 08 2012 06:48 ishyishy wrote:
I'm completely fine with anything they change to the chat system; i dont care at all about chat related things in sc2 or D3. If I want to have an effective chat session opened with someone in order to play the game together, then I will use Skype.
That doesn't work quite as well for meeting new people. And on a macro scale it means a kind of schizoid community.
On February 08 2012 06:48 ishyishy wrote:
Does anyone even use the blizzard public channels in sc2 anymore? I see like 10 people average in General chat, and 100 at all times in the TL "private" channel lol.
The Battle.net 2.0 implementation of chat is wanting in general, though.
|
On February 08 2012 06:48 ishyishy wrote:
I'm completely fine with anything they change to the chat system; i dont care at all about chat related things in sc2 or D3. If I want to have an effective chat session opened with someone in order to play the game together, then I will use Skype.
Does anyone even use the blizzard public channels in sc2 anymore? I see like 10 people average in General chat, and 100 at all times in the TL "private" channel lol.
A lot of people can be found in teams and strategy channels. A lot of the conversation is balance QQ, but regardless, it's important it's there.
So you're some one who has buddies that plan on purchasing the game upon launch and you guys will use Skype, etc to communicate. What about the tens of thousands of people who don't have friends that have any desire to purchase the game? What if their friends are different time zones, away, etc?
The problem then comes, this person may want to do X, Y, Z runs, but now is stuck waiting 20 minutes for a game that isn't full to come up. Instead of simply going into X, Y, Z channel and saying: "Anyone want to do X, Y, Z runs?" Additionally, what about trading? You're stuck in small confined games, or an auction house. What if you want to trade your X item for their Y item on the spot? A public trading channel is crucial.
|
On February 08 2012 06:46 AndAgain wrote:
Pardon my ignorance, but why is chat so important to you guys? There's already TL, Reddit, and Skype/Teamspeak. Would you really be spending that much time on chat?
Because unless you're using one of those methods you listed, it's unbearably painful to try and interact with other players through the current system. That in itself would be fair enough, but the fact that 2.0 is clearly inferior to 1.0 in basically every way, and to implement these changes seems to be like it would take minimal effort, it really seems like a complete and total slap in the face to everyone that expected these features for their hefty 60-70 dollars.
|
I'll agree that more options for chat is always good.
I don't agree that the global channels had any impact on the enjoyment of D2. Honestly there was nothing special or fun about using the trade channels.
The general channel you would be greeted with never had anything more than barrens-level commentary. You didn't meet people there. You didn't find friend there.
You find friends in-game. Somebody earlier in the thread had a long post that sounded pretty good but his whole argument was based on the premise that nobody made friends in-game and it all happened in global channels. I completely disagree. Nobody I ever knew made friends using global channels. The few people outside of our RL friends we would meet in-game. It would be because we ended up having a long session together and started chatting. This notion that 'nobody chats ingame cuz they are focused on gameplay' is total BS. If you played D2 for any amount of time, you did a lot of in-game chatting.
So yeah... more chat options is a good thing. In fact, I would think Blizzard would absolutely LOVE the opportunity to ban tons of spammers and force them to buy a new copy of D3 over and over and over. I mean... they really got a thing goin with WoW. The spam is very minimal but it does happen and a big part of the Gold Farming's operating expensive is simply 'buying more copies of WoW'. Kinda surprising that they don't want to simply fight it... make more money and make customers more happy. Seems like a win/win/win to me.
|
On February 08 2012 06:36 iamke55 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 23:13 Longshank wrote:On February 07 2012 23:10 bgx wrote: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? I believe Blizzard told us Battle.net 2.0 was going to be so good that people wouldn't want to play on LAN.
Unless my memory fails me, this was never a promise. It was 'We want to make Battle.net 2.0 so good that...' rather than 'We promise to make...'
It seems like people are confused to what game is being discussed here. Bashiok's post was regarding D3, not SC2. They are two completely different games with quite different ways to communicate and socialize. The public channels were good in BW/WC3, they weren't in D2.
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
On February 08 2012 06:51 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 06:46 AndAgain wrote:
Pardon my ignorance, but why is chat so important to you guys? There's already TL, Reddit, and Skype/Teamspeak. Would you really be spending that much time on chat? I can't explain it, but in BW I would idle in channel and chat away. I would join random games that got created from the chat channel just to observe. SC2 is pure business. Log on, play, log off, talk to no one. That was my experience anyways.
Being able to start race wars out of nowhere in a chat channel is the stuff of legends.
|
someday blizzard will make ops for channels... someday...
|
For Diablo 3 being delayed so long, i feel like the number of features that are being removed (or never added for that matter) is kind of ridiculous. I was so excited for the game but every time they make a statement it makes me less and less eager for its release.
|
"Can Blizzard do whatever they want and we'll still buy and play their games?"
Did you seriously just ask this question? ><
|
i dont understand this topic overall, i used to play broodwar from 1999-2009 for 10 years and i have to say i like the chat in sc2 much more then the old bnet 1.0
and all who cares about "guys can join channel" man you can ignore everyone you want and he CANT make a smurf easy and talk to you. seems just an "i not wanna changes" problem but time means changes
all this /F w things where you get anoyed by everyone, 1 million bots in every channel spamming nonstop, etc etc.... its like germans talking about east germany as it was NICE but forget all bad things
ops for channel would be abused as hell like in sc1, "i dont like your nose, kicked" etc it was just bad and as it is its fine
you CANT go in a channel and start brutal flamewar cause its your only account and there is a god damn report system that works (jaeh i know alot says "that doesnt work etc" but i know several guys who cant flame anymore cause blizzard take care of them)
|
On February 08 2012 06:51 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 06:46 AndAgain wrote:
Pardon my ignorance, but why is chat so important to you guys? There's already TL, Reddit, and Skype/Teamspeak. Would you really be spending that much time on chat? I can't explain it, but in BW I would idle in channel and chat away. I would join random games that got created from the chat channel just to observe. SC2 is pure business. Log on, play, log off, talk to no one. That was my experience anyways.
It's not really just "your experience" though. It's how the game was designed. If there's nothing to do between games, the only reason people are online is to play games. And if you're playing, you're probably not also chatting. That's what forums and skype are for.
Honestly, though, it isn't just SC and Diablo which are heading this way. The internet in general used to be a place people went when it was still novel to meet someone from random parts of the world and chat about nothing. That's why they put chat channels in - because chatting with random people was so novel. Now, it's a place everyone goes to with friends in place to do things with said friends. Social media is largely to blame for this. But D2 and SC1 were made for a different internet, and Blizzard has disregarded the internet that a lot of the communities which began when D2 and SC1 were based on, and followed the new model. They went with facebook-style interaction instead of chat room style interaction. It sucks for community-building, but that's not really what they were hoping to do - they were hoping to leverage existing communities/circles of friends a la facebook instead. You can argue that it's a better model or a worse one in ideological terms, but they're not thinking in ideological terms - they're just going the same direction most everything else on the internet is going.
|
On February 08 2012 06:46 AndAgain wrote:
Pardon my ignorance, but why is chat so important to you guys? There's already TL, Reddit, and Skype/Teamspeak. Would you really be spending that much time on chat?
Imagine you're playing soccer, or any other kind of sport for that matter.
SC/BW or WC3: You'd chat with your team mates or fellows before and after matches and rounds in your club house. Sure, you'd call them as well, and you'd write emails, but your club house is the central place to meet and your home away from home. You host parties, meet new people, build relationships and grudges.
SC2: You only drive to the field, play ball, and leave again. Occasionally you'd shout a greeting to your team mates or the opponents, and you'd have a minute to chat at half-time. But all communication and organization is done almost exclusively via phone or mail. There's no club house, no "home base" for your clique of players.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
