|
This is what Blizzard CM Bashiok had to say regarding the chatsystem for their upcoming game Diablo 3, which will be played on Battlenet 0.2 just like Starcraft 2.
"It seems there’s been some confusion taken from the above statement I made back in September. The chat in Diablo III is exactly as I described, you do all of it in a single window. StarCraft II has a system where each chat is broken out into a separate window, chat program-style, but Diablo III keeps it all in one. The same single window that’s used for chat when you eventually jump into a game, too.
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. Most people that want chat channels though are referring to guild channels, or otherwise channels they themselves can operate and choose to invite others to, and we see those as completely valid forms of chat (there’s a social structure backing the channel). As I said, back in September, it’s unlikely to be anything we attain for ship, but the social group-type chat features are still very much a desire for the future. "
The reason I post this here on the SC2 forum is because both D3 and SC2 players are in the same boat regarding being stuck on Battlenet 0.2. I thought this might interest some of you fellow Starcrafters who aren't following the D3 development, since it might be an indication of them not being very eager to improve the SC2 chat in the near future.
I'm a Starcrafter myself but I'm also a big fan of the Diablo series. It seems they haven't taken the feedback from SC2 players regarding the terrible chatsystem very seriously since they are giving D3 players the same shitty system. Needless to say there are many D3 fans who are far from happy with this announcement.
Can Blizzard do whatever they want and we'll still buy and play their games? or is there a way the Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 communities can unite and convince Blizzard to improve the chatsystem? We are in the same boat regarding this afterall.
Bashioks original statement: http://blues.incgamers.com/Posts/10/1/40/819/147519/the-lack-of-a-general-chat-just-sucks#postId_399627
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EDIT: It appears they have now changed their minds, according to Bashiok it was just him being uninformed, I believe the community uproar actually made a difference on this one. Thank god for that no matter how it happened :D
Update from Bashiok: "Soooooo... hey everyone. How's it going? Good? Weather ok? Great... so, right... You know how sometimes you say something that's stupid and wrong and then people very reasonably get upset and create a lot of threads and discussions and demands with some pretty reasonable reasons for the thing you said wouldn't happen but then it turns out that you're stupid and wrong and the things you said are completely the opposite of what's actually true?
Yeah. So that happened. Public chat channels will be in Diablo III, barring any catastrophe that requires we remove them, because they're already implemented. In fact they'll be in an upcoming beta patch so you'll get to see and play around with them yourselves.
I'm not sure I can offer any explanation as to the incorrectness of my statements, except that I believed them to be correct when I made them. I apologize, and I'll strive to not be stupid and wrong in the future.
More info on the chat feature, and others, to come in the weeks ahead. Thanks for sticking with it, and me."
Good job everyone who voiced their concerns on this one, there was quite a community uproar about the chat.Good sign for SC2 chat in HOTS? :p
Link to Bashioks update: http://blues.incgamers.com/Posts/10/1/40/819/147849/the-lack-of-general-chat-just-sucks-contx2#postId_400451
|
im happy with chat system and i dont see nothing bad in it when i turn on sc2 i play when i need to chat with someone im not having any trouble
|
I really don't see what's so hard about setting up an option for such a guild channel...
|
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.
|
if that means that all the chat will be set up in tabs, then I could be infavor of that... sc2's chat system can get a bit chaotic when your chatting with 6+ peoople
|
On February 07 2012 18:44 taitanik wrote:
im happy with chat system and i dont see nothing bad in it when i turn on sc2 i play when i need to chat with someone im not having any trouble
Hey there; fine if SC2's system works for you. But please check out the thread on SC2's UI here on TL where we've gathered a lot of feedback and information. Both the UI in general and the chat could be so much better.
|
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.
|
Ah! More people to join us in our misery. That does make me feel slightly better, actually!
|
To me, it sounds like they are making D3 chat system, equal to WoW chat system with only 1 window, but several chats in it (World chat, party chat. etc) and that they are not making any Guild structures in the game on release.
SC2 is much more individual hence the game doesn't open up to the same game structures as D3 or WoW where parties and guilds are much more natural. And Blizzard properly doesn't want to make any bots because that's not fancy enough. They properly think that chat isn't really something the game should offer, it's best done by programs outside the game.
|
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.
|
United Kingdom16710 Posts
O Blizzard, Where Art Thou? T_______T
|
The reason I post this here on the SC2 forum is because both D3 and SC2 players are in the same boat regarding being stuck on Battlenet 0.2. I thought this might interest some of you fellow Starcrafters who aren't following the D3 development, since it might be an indication of them not being very eager to improve the SC2 chat in the near future.
Except D3 and SC2 are not developed by the same people, just under the same category. The chat system may work for D3, but perhaps not so well for SC2 HOTS.
A bit too paranoid.
Can Blizzard do whatever they want and we'll still buy and play their games? or is there a way the Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 communities can unite and convince Blizzard to improve the chatsystem? We are in the same boat regarding this afterall.
Good demonizing and discussion topics.
|
On February 07 2012 18:52 ZenDeX wrote:Show nested quote +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.
exactly. I`ve never read any comments attack the old battle.nets chat system, but tons of complains regarding the new one.
|
On February 07 2012 18:55 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +The reason I post this here on the SC2 forum is because both D3 and SC2 players are in the same boat regarding being stuck on Battlenet 0.2. I thought this might interest some of you fellow Starcrafters who aren't following the D3 development, since it might be an indication of them not being very eager to improve the SC2 chat in the near future. Except D3 and SC2 are not developed by the same people, just under the same category. The chat system may work for D3, but perhaps not so well for SC2 HOTS. A bit too paranoid.
He just confirmed that the D3 chat will be like the SC2 chat but in one window instead of popup windows for the chat. There also won't be any public channels like there was on Bnet 1.0. If you've played Diablo then you know that the chatsystem for Diablo 2 and Starcraft 1 work very similarly.
A bit too uninformed.
|
Well.. The new one did not even exist at release.. Don't forget that ^^.
|
On February 07 2012 18:55 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +The reason I post this here on the SC2 forum is because both D3 and SC2 players are in the same boat regarding being stuck on Battlenet 0.2. I thought this might interest some of you fellow Starcrafters who aren't following the D3 development, since it might be an indication of them not being very eager to improve the SC2 chat in the near future. Except D3 and SC2 are not developed by the same people, just under the same category. The chat system may work for D3, but perhaps not so well for SC2 HOTS. A bit too paranoid. Show nested quote +
Can Blizzard do whatever they want and we'll still buy and play their games? or is there a way the Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 communities can unite and convince Blizzard to improve the chatsystem? We are in the same boat regarding this afterall.
Good demonizing and discussion topics.
Proper chat (or rather the lack thereof) is a big topic on the D3 boards. It's not like there's just paranoid Starcraft fans up in arms, the D3 crowd is criticizing their system as well.
http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/4015163779?page=1
|
On February 07 2012 19:01 Gurgl wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 18:55 Torte de Lini wrote:The reason I post this here on the SC2 forum is because both D3 and SC2 players are in the same boat regarding being stuck on Battlenet 0.2. I thought this might interest some of you fellow Starcrafters who aren't following the D3 development, since it might be an indication of them not being very eager to improve the SC2 chat in the near future. Except D3 and SC2 are not developed by the same people, just under the same category. The chat system may work for D3, but perhaps not so well for SC2 HOTS. A bit too paranoid. He just confirmed that the D3 chat will be like the SC2 chat but in one window instead of popup windows for the chat. There also won't be any public channels like there was on Bnet 1.0. If you've played Diablo then you know that the chatsystem for Diablo 2 and Starcraft 1 work very similarly. A bit too uninformed.
Can we have a source of when this was said? Time matters when this was said.
Additionally, isn't B.net developed not by Diablo developers or StarCraft II but Battle.net developers? How is this in relation to HOTS? They're talking about Diablo here and it doesn't reflect the choices that a whole new team of developers will make on HOTS.
Uninformed? There's no information rofl, it's stretching ideas past the post and hoping it'll hold under the guide that if they do it to D3, then the entire body of the company will follow suit with HOTS despite the company separated by franchises and different developers.
Thanks Shock for the timestamp, so this is recent!
The case is still the same though, what they do to D3 doesn't necessarily mean anything about HOTS. The people making D3 aren't all the same people working on HOTS and the chat system will vary depending on the game (just like D3 has no general chat and WOL has a general chat + more)
|
On February 07 2012 18:52 ZenDeX wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Unfiltered chat still exists in games like World of Warcraft and believe me when I say that having that kind of freedom is not always the best option as long as other options can be implemented in a superior fashion.
In this case, the advent of clan/guild channels would do a tremendous job in creating more community on SC2 as well as a program that allows for shared replays both of which are currently in development by the Blizzard team.
They're going after the good ideas, the ones that will actually create the kind of community we want. The easy solution of just adding open chat channels isn't the end all solution but rather a step in the wrong direction.
|
Talk about heavy cherry-picking:
Most people that want chat channels though are referring to guild channels, or otherwise channels they themselves can operate and choose to invite others to, and we see those as completely valid forms of chat (there's a social structure backing the channel). As I said, back in September, it's unlikely to be anything we attain for ship, but the social group-type chat features are still very much a desire for the future.
At least quote the whole thing, (Thanks Shockk for the link)
http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/4015163779?page=1#20
General chat may go, but guild channels and such are still under the radar
|
On February 07 2012 19:06 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 19:01 Gurgl wrote:On February 07 2012 18:55 Torte de Lini wrote:The reason I post this here on the SC2 forum is because both D3 and SC2 players are in the same boat regarding being stuck on Battlenet 0.2. I thought this might interest some of you fellow Starcrafters who aren't following the D3 development, since it might be an indication of them not being very eager to improve the SC2 chat in the near future. Except D3 and SC2 are not developed by the same people, just under the same category. The chat system may work for D3, but perhaps not so well for SC2 HOTS. A bit too paranoid. He just confirmed that the D3 chat will be like the SC2 chat but in one window instead of popup windows for the chat. There also won't be any public channels like there was on Bnet 1.0. If you've played Diablo then you know that the chatsystem for Diablo 2 and Starcraft 1 work very similarly. A bit too uninformed. Can we have a source of when this was said? Time matters when this was said. Additionally, isn't B.net developed not by Diablo developers or StarCraft II but Battle.net developers? How is this in relation to HOTS? They're talking about Diablo here and it doesn't reflect the choices that a whole new team of developers will make on HOTS. Uninformed? There's no information rofl, it's stretching ideas past the post and hoping it'll hold under the guide that if they do it to D3, then the entire body of the company will follow suit with HOTS despite the company separated by franchises and different developers. Thanks Shock for the timestamp, so this is recent!The case is still the same though, what they do to D3 doesn't necessarily mean anything about HOTS. The people making D3 aren't all the same people working on HOTS and the chat system will vary depending on the game (just like D3 has no general chat and WOL has a general chat + more)
The chatsystem is more tied to Battlenet than the actual game. SC1 ,D2 and WC3 used Bnet 1.0 and had pretty much identical chatsystems with public channels etc. SC2 and D3 are both using Bnet 0.2 and from his statement are going to have pretty much identical chatsystems.
Original Bashiok post: http://blues.incgamers.com/Posts/10/1/40/819/147519/the-lack-of-a-general-chat-just-sucks#postId_399627
|
On February 07 2012 19:10 Torte de Lini wrote:Talk about heavy cherry-picking: Show nested quote +Most people that want chat channels though are referring to guild channels, or otherwise channels they themselves can operate and choose to invite others to, and we see those as completely valid forms of chat (there's a social structure backing the channel). As I said, back in September, it's unlikely to be anything we attain for ship, but the social group-type chat features are still very much a desire for the future. At least quote the whole thing, ( Thanks Shockk for the link) http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/4015163779?page=1#20General chat may go, but guild channels and such are still under the radar
But the issue remains: Guild and private chats support existing communities and contacts. But actually meeting people without a general chat becomes a real challenge. I'll quote this well written reply from the D3 boards:
I'm just going to come straight out and say, as a player, I think you're wrong.
It's hard to really have a community without open public chat channels. There was almost no moderation, if any, in the D2 public channels. There just needs to be watering-hole type areas for people to gather and meet and discuss and talk about the game.
I mean how are you supposed to just randomly meet people in D3 or recruit? Just hope the 3 people in your D3 games take the time to talk to you while franatically hacking down monsters? It just doesn't happen. Everyone is too focused on gaming while in the game.
It just seems like you guys are making the EXACT SAME mistake you made with SC2 and almost flat out going out of your way to impair community building. YOU HAVE TO HAVE PUBLIC CHAT CHANNELS IN AN ONLINE GAME.
It's not an option to me. I just don't see how you guys can make such a folly of a decision to not have public chat channels in an online action RPG or similar game where community is important.
Please, please, for everything that is good in having a strong community, reconsider putting public chat channels back in. There's simply no other way to foster good community building. Almost nobody really friends people off of random public games because the majority won't even talk in them due to the way the combat flows.
Edit: I know why you don't want them. Botters, phishers, spammers, trolls ect ect ect. I'm sorry, but you guys need to suck it up and attempt to deal with those issues. You can't hack off a guy's arm because you're out of bandaids for the papercut he got.
http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/4015163779?page=10#183
|
On February 07 2012 19:12 Gurgl wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 19:06 Torte de Lini wrote:On February 07 2012 19:01 Gurgl wrote:On February 07 2012 18:55 Torte de Lini wrote:The reason I post this here on the SC2 forum is because both D3 and SC2 players are in the same boat regarding being stuck on Battlenet 0.2. I thought this might interest some of you fellow Starcrafters who aren't following the D3 development, since it might be an indication of them not being very eager to improve the SC2 chat in the near future. Except D3 and SC2 are not developed by the same people, just under the same category. The chat system may work for D3, but perhaps not so well for SC2 HOTS. A bit too paranoid. He just confirmed that the D3 chat will be like the SC2 chat but in one window instead of popup windows for the chat. There also won't be any public channels like there was on Bnet 1.0. If you've played Diablo then you know that the chatsystem for Diablo 2 and Starcraft 1 work very similarly. A bit too uninformed. Can we have a source of when this was said? Time matters when this was said. Additionally, isn't B.net developed not by Diablo developers or StarCraft II but Battle.net developers? How is this in relation to HOTS? They're talking about Diablo here and it doesn't reflect the choices that a whole new team of developers will make on HOTS. Uninformed? There's no information rofl, it's stretching ideas past the post and hoping it'll hold under the guide that if they do it to D3, then the entire body of the company will follow suit with HOTS despite the company separated by franchises and different developers. Thanks Shock for the timestamp, so this is recent!The case is still the same though, what they do to D3 doesn't necessarily mean anything about HOTS. The people making D3 aren't all the same people working on HOTS and the chat system will vary depending on the game (just like D3 has no general chat and WOL has a general chat + more) The chatsystem is more tied to Battlenet than the actual game. SC1 ,D2 and WC3 used Bnet 1.0 and had pretty much identical chatsystems with public channels etc. SC2 and D3 are both using Bnet 0.2 and and from his statement are going to have pretty much identical chatsystems. Original Bashiok post: http://blues.incgamers.com/Posts/10/1/40/819/147519/the-lack-of-a-general-chat-just-sucks#postId_399627
Thanks for the source.
Isn't it contradictory to base Blizzard actions on having similar battle.net chat system on all three of a previous generation of games when they completely revised the whole of B.net + chat and even showing variations of how the chat system will function based on the game?
He doesn't say anything about HOTS and if anything at all, that would be intended.
|
On February 07 2012 19:12 Shockk wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 19:10 Torte de Lini wrote:Talk about heavy cherry-picking: Most people that want chat channels though are referring to guild channels, or otherwise channels they themselves can operate and choose to invite others to, and we see those as completely valid forms of chat (there's a social structure backing the channel). As I said, back in September, it's unlikely to be anything we attain for ship, but the social group-type chat features are still very much a desire for the future. At least quote the whole thing, ( Thanks Shockk for the link) http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/4015163779?page=1#20General chat may go, but guild channels and such are still under the radar But the issue remains: Guild and private chats support existing communities and contacts. But actually meeting people without a general chat becomes a real challenge. I'll quote this well written reply from the D3 boards: Show nested quote +I'm just going to come straight out and say, as a player, I think you're wrong.
It's hard to really have a community without open public chat channels. There was almost no moderation, if any, in the D2 public channels. There just needs to be watering-hole type areas for people to gather and meet and discuss and talk about the game.
I mean how are you supposed to just randomly meet people in D3 or recruit? Just hope the 3 people in your D3 games take the time to talk to you while franatically hacking down monsters? It just doesn't happen. Everyone is too focused on gaming while in the game.
It just seems like you guys are making the EXACT SAME mistake you made with SC2 and almost flat out going out of your way to impair community building. YOU HAVE TO HAVE PUBLIC CHAT CHANNELS IN AN ONLINE GAME.
It's not an option to me. I just don't see how you guys can make such a folly of a decision to not have public chat channels in an online action RPG or similar game where community is important.
Please, please, for everything that is good in having a strong community, reconsider putting public chat channels back in. There's simply no other way to foster good community building. Almost nobody really friends people off of random public games because the majority won't even talk in them due to the way the combat flows.
Edit: I know why you don't want them. Botters, phishers, spammers, trolls ect ect ect. I'm sorry, but you guys need to suck it up and attempt to deal with those issues. You can't hack off a guy's arm because you're out of bandaids for the papercut he got. http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/4015163779?page=10#183
Look, I'm not disagreeing with the need of public chat channels, it isn't even the topic at-hand and look at the discussion questions the OP makes.
|
On February 07 2012 19:10 Torte de Lini wrote:Talk about heavy cherry-picking: Show nested quote +Most people that want chat channels though are referring to guild channels, or otherwise channels they themselves can operate and choose to invite others to, and we see those as completely valid forms of chat (there's a social structure backing the channel). As I said, back in September, it's unlikely to be anything we attain for ship, but the social group-type chat features are still very much a desire for the future. At least quote the whole thing, ( Thanks Shockk for the link) http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/4015163779?page=1#20General chat may go, but guild channels and such are still under the radar
As silly as it may sound, I think Blizzard is understaffed in the battle.net department. Since it's always "we hope to add X later, and Y for the future. "
|
On February 07 2012 19:17 Seiniyta wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 19:10 Torte de Lini wrote:Talk about heavy cherry-picking: Most people that want chat channels though are referring to guild channels, or otherwise channels they themselves can operate and choose to invite others to, and we see those as completely valid forms of chat (there's a social structure backing the channel). As I said, back in September, it's unlikely to be anything we attain for ship, but the social group-type chat features are still very much a desire for the future. At least quote the whole thing, ( Thanks Shockk for the link) http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/4015163779?page=1#20General chat may go, but guild channels and such are still under the radar As silly as it may sound, I think Blizzard is understaffed in the battle.net department. Since it's always "we hope to add X later, and Y for the future. "
It's probably more prioritizing than anything else imo.
|
On February 07 2012 19:14 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 19:12 Gurgl wrote:On February 07 2012 19:06 Torte de Lini wrote:On February 07 2012 19:01 Gurgl wrote:On February 07 2012 18:55 Torte de Lini wrote:The reason I post this here on the SC2 forum is because both D3 and SC2 players are in the same boat regarding being stuck on Battlenet 0.2. I thought this might interest some of you fellow Starcrafters who aren't following the D3 development, since it might be an indication of them not being very eager to improve the SC2 chat in the near future. Except D3 and SC2 are not developed by the same people, just under the same category. The chat system may work for D3, but perhaps not so well for SC2 HOTS. A bit too paranoid. He just confirmed that the D3 chat will be like the SC2 chat but in one window instead of popup windows for the chat. There also won't be any public channels like there was on Bnet 1.0. If you've played Diablo then you know that the chatsystem for Diablo 2 and Starcraft 1 work very similarly. A bit too uninformed. Can we have a source of when this was said? Time matters when this was said. Additionally, isn't B.net developed not by Diablo developers or StarCraft II but Battle.net developers? How is this in relation to HOTS? They're talking about Diablo here and it doesn't reflect the choices that a whole new team of developers will make on HOTS. Uninformed? There's no information rofl, it's stretching ideas past the post and hoping it'll hold under the guide that if they do it to D3, then the entire body of the company will follow suit with HOTS despite the company separated by franchises and different developers. Thanks Shock for the timestamp, so this is recent!The case is still the same though, what they do to D3 doesn't necessarily mean anything about HOTS. The people making D3 aren't all the same people working on HOTS and the chat system will vary depending on the game (just like D3 has no general chat and WOL has a general chat + more) The chatsystem is more tied to Battlenet than the actual game. SC1 ,D2 and WC3 used Bnet 1.0 and had pretty much identical chatsystems with public channels etc. SC2 and D3 are both using Bnet 0.2 and and from his statement are going to have pretty much identical chatsystems. Original Bashiok post: http://blues.incgamers.com/Posts/10/1/40/819/147519/the-lack-of-a-general-chat-just-sucks#postId_399627 Thanks for the source. Isn't it contradictory to base Blizzard actions on having similar battle.net chat system on all three of a previous generation of games when they completely revised the whole of B.net + chat and even showing variations of how the chat system will function based on the game? He doesn't say anything about HOTS and if anything at all, that would be intended.
I'm not stating any facts regarding the chat in HOTS. The chatsystem for Diablo 3, which still doesn't have a release date, is going to be like the current chatsystem in SC2. To me that is a bad sign for the chatsystem in HOTS aswell since if they were improving the chatsystem they would likely do it for both games because the chatsystem is tied to Bnet 0.2 which both games use.
|
On February 07 2012 19:15 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 19:12 Shockk wrote:On February 07 2012 19:10 Torte de Lini wrote:Talk about heavy cherry-picking: Most people that want chat channels though are referring to guild channels, or otherwise channels they themselves can operate and choose to invite others to, and we see those as completely valid forms of chat (there's a social structure backing the channel). As I said, back in September, it's unlikely to be anything we attain for ship, but the social group-type chat features are still very much a desire for the future. At least quote the whole thing, ( Thanks Shockk for the link) http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/4015163779?page=1#20General chat may go, but guild channels and such are still under the radar But the issue remains: Guild and private chats support existing communities and contacts. But actually meeting people without a general chat becomes a real challenge. I'll quote this well written reply from the D3 boards: I'm just going to come straight out and say, as a player, I think you're wrong.
It's hard to really have a community without open public chat channels. There was almost no moderation, if any, in the D2 public channels. There just needs to be watering-hole type areas for people to gather and meet and discuss and talk about the game.
I mean how are you supposed to just randomly meet people in D3 or recruit? Just hope the 3 people in your D3 games take the time to talk to you while franatically hacking down monsters? It just doesn't happen. Everyone is too focused on gaming while in the game.
It just seems like you guys are making the EXACT SAME mistake you made with SC2 and almost flat out going out of your way to impair community building. YOU HAVE TO HAVE PUBLIC CHAT CHANNELS IN AN ONLINE GAME.
It's not an option to me. I just don't see how you guys can make such a folly of a decision to not have public chat channels in an online action RPG or similar game where community is important.
Please, please, for everything that is good in having a strong community, reconsider putting public chat channels back in. There's simply no other way to foster good community building. Almost nobody really friends people off of random public games because the majority won't even talk in them due to the way the combat flows.
Edit: I know why you don't want them. Botters, phishers, spammers, trolls ect ect ect. I'm sorry, but you guys need to suck it up and attempt to deal with those issues. You can't hack off a guy's arm because you're out of bandaids for the papercut he got. http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/4015163779?page=10#183 Look, I'm not disagreeing with the need of public chat channels, it isn't even the topic at-hand and look at the discussion questions the OP makes.
Well, I did, and I think his concern is valid. We had horrible community features in the SC2 beta, Blizzard didn't listen, and the game was released with glaring flaws which mostly weren't fixed or adressed to this point. We're having exactly the same routine now happening in D3. Regardless of whether or not the same teams work on either games, it's not too far fetched to assume that we'll be looking at a similar development for HotS.
I interpret Bashiok's statements not as D3 exclusive, but rather as the company stance on their games as a whole. It's always been like that.
|
It's simple, some1 buy the game and stream it to see if Blizzard delivered, if they didn't, try to boycott Blizzard by making tons of threads all over the net about how much Battlenet 0.000002 sucks . If Blizzard sees that they are hurt economicaly ( even tho they will make tons of money even with the shitty chat model anyways ), they would probably create a decent chat support...
You can bitch about it on and on, but if you just talk and talk and then buy the game, you simply approved their product, your whining is invalid. Don't buy the game ( after you've seen extensive gameplay ), and if more people choose to not buy the game, who knows, maybe in a patch or two they will change. You must convince tons of possible buyers to wait until Blizzard delivers what we desire ( what in fact is not really hard to create, they did in 2000, if they wanted, they could make something 10 times as awesome than the Battlenet 1.0 , instead of something 10 times worse than it ).
Problem is, Diablo3 doesn't have it's competition that it requires for Blizzard to deliver the best thing possible... I don't think I'm the only one who was totally in love with Diablo2,LoD and totally "prayed to God" that some1 will make Diablo3 which should be even more awesome than D2LOD...But seeing how much of a f*ck they give about us, the PC gamers, I don't see why we should support them, as consumers, our only power is to simply not buy it....If they don't deliver please guys DO NOT BUY IT, and if you do, DON'T MAKE THREADS ABOUT HOW CHAT SUPPORT IS AWEFULL.
|
Here's what I disagree with: Saying that based on Diablo III choice of chat features, HOTS will thus have the same features (despite 0 updates or even mention of what they're going to do).
Here's what I agree with: Advocating to Blizzard to give a public statement about what the chat system will look like in HOTS.
I'm saying don't jump to a conclusion, but rather consider the possibility and press for more details rather than open stupid discussion questions like the OP.
Good night (I'm going to sleep, nearly 5:30 a.m)
|
Get your shit together, blizzard.
|
On February 07 2012 19:25 Torte de Lini wrote:
Here's what I disagree with: Saying that based on Diablo III choice of chat features, HOTS will thus have the same features (despite 0 updates or even mention of what they're going to do).
Here's what I agree with: Advocating to Blizzard to give a public statement about what the chat system will look like in HOTS.
I'm saying don't jump to a conclusion, but rather consider the possibility and press for more details rather than open stupid discussion questions like the OP.
Good night (I'm going to sleep, nearly 5:30 a.m)
You seem to ignore all of the development of social features in Blizzard games with the last two WoW addons, SC2 and now D3 just for the sake of discussion. Of course it could be that we'll see something completely different for HotS, but three whole years of vague community manager statements and little to no goodwill except for the lackluster SC2 chat speak otherwise.
Asking Blizzard for a statement on chat is just one part of the many pleas for attention and improvement they've ignored since the SC2 Beta. Even if it came, it'd be another vague "We'd like to ... yadda ... horizon ... yadda ... future plans."
And please don't call other people's incentive to start discussions "stupid" as long as you're arguing just for the sake of it and while ignoring all background development.
|
Clan support needs to come...it's gotten a bit ridiculous.
|
On February 07 2012 19:25 Torte de Lini wrote:
Here's what I disagree with: Saying that based on Diablo III choice of chat features, HOTS will thus have the same features (despite 0 updates or even mention of what they're going to do).
Here's what I agree with: Advocating to Blizzard to give a public statement about what the chat system will look like in HOTS.
I'm saying don't jump to a conclusion, but rather consider the possibility and press for more details rather than open stupid discussion questions like the OP.
Good night (I'm going to sleep, nearly 5:30 a.m)
It has been near two years since SC2 has been out. Still no improvement to battle.net, other than them literally adding a shitty chat system AFTER releasing the game. If they have no plans to implement a normal chat system on a NEW game that hasn't been released yet, why in the world would they add one to HOTS when they can just piggyback off the shit they currently have implemented?
People have constantly harassed Blizzard about when they plan on adding X, Y, Z, and their answer is the same every time. "We have plans to release it in the future."
|
They don't want public and open chat channels in d3 because that could potentially be an apt way for botters and famers to spam their item selling sites, which is against what they are trying to do with the RMAH.
Just think about this, login into d2 pub chat right now, you will be greeted with a page or two from bots trying to sell you duped items.
I'm not defending them at this juncture, I'm just stating what might be their reasoning behind this in my opinion.
I actually agree on the fact that, without community building features like public chat channels, it gets very very hard to forge new friendships. You just get to play with people you know already, from outside the game, but you have night to none interaction with people from the game only.
|
Demanding a public statement is useless, I think it's more useful to have a community interview or a interviewer who asks some of those question and responds on them if the answer is too vague.
|
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.
|
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.
Try to strike the word "whining" from your vocabulary when confronted with people voicing legitimate concerns. You're not contributing but only coming across as an arrogant douche.
As for the chat: It's not the players' fault that Blizzard's only solution to chats being overrun by bots and spammer is to outright remove them. Open channels have their place, and they only devolved that much in D2 because Blizzard did nothing to fix the problem. And despite being as chaotic as they were, they still provided a means for finding trade partners, clan mates or friends, and thus created a vibrant feeling of community that's missing from both SC and D3.
|
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.
|
On February 07 2012 20:08 Orracle wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
whine whine, gtfo!
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On February 07 2012 18:47 Shockk wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 18:44 taitanik wrote:
im happy with chat system and i dont see nothing bad in it when i turn on sc2 i play when i need to chat with someone im not having any trouble Hey there; fine if SC2's system works for you. But please check out the thread on SC2's UI here on TL where we've gathered a lot of feedback and information. Both the UI in general and the chat could be so much better.
I personally like the UI, just like taitanik. I think it does just what I want it to do, and does it pretty well. So Bnet's UI isn't really a concern for me.
|
They just didn't moderate them in the past and it worked fine.
You don't want public Channels? Just don't read them.
I don't like football (soccer)... And still i'm fine with others wasting their time watching it.
The Bnet UI basically does NOTHING.
It's a friendlist with a fiend match button.
Everything else was done better in WC3.
You had more stats.
You had a better chat system.
You had a better (actually working) custom game system).
.
.
You had a decent (NOT perfect) interface.
Bnet 2.0 is just worse, worse and worse.. BUT FACEBOOK INTEGRATIOOOON!! I wonder how much Facebook payed them for that...
I mean.. WHAT is there to like about Bnet 2.0 which wasn't possible in Bnet 1.0.
|
Blizzard is so hit and miss.
Bw had multiplayer replays.
Wc3 had automated tournaments.
Sc2 has replay rollback.
Why, this is so illogical. Each game has a feature the other two don't.
You would expect the newer ones to have at least the same or better featurelist as the previous ones, not this retarded rollercoaster.
|
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.
Agreed. I don't bother joining any of the available channels on Starcraft2. I do join a few practice channels. The only chat function I'm missing in SC2 is lack of moderation in private channels as well as lack of guild/clan support (also missing from D3 launch..).
If they fixed the custom game finding ability that would go a long way (but I still think they're holding out to find a way to mild us for some sort of fee first).
|
On February 07 2012 20:37 PlosionCornu wrote:
Blizzard is so hit and miss.
Bw had multiplayer replays.
Wc3 had automated tournaments.
Sc2 has replay rollback.
Why, this is so illogical.
I love you, man.
|
On February 07 2012 20:37 y0su 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. Agreed. I don't bother joining any of the available channels on Starcraft2. I do join a few practice channels. The only chat function I'm missing in SC2 is lack of moderation in private channels as well as lack of guild/clan support (also missing from D3 launch..). If they fixed the custom game finding ability that would go a long way (but I still think they're holding out to find a way to mild us for some sort of fee first).
Yeah I agree, those things should be added asap,
|
![[image loading]](http://media.wowstead.com/attachments/thumbnails/159/313/650/372/634252388214136425.jpg)
well they did integrate the chat channels but they are not as good as the old bnet chat channels
also it is still not possible to watch replays together with friends or create clans
|
The problem is that Blizzard stopped developing for PC gamers a long time ago. SC2, D3 and the later WoW expansions are not aimed at the same people that D1,D2, SC1, WC3 and early WoW was aimed at.
To explain what i mean:
In recent years the gaming market has exploded. Farmville is a big culprit (is it even a game?) - anyone who has Facebook can use it and be exposed to it. And that's a lot of people.
Console games as well - people who wouldnt want to be one of those nerdy computer gamers will happily play a game on the xbox or ps3. You don't need to worry about anything like having a decent mouse, monitor and generally a good computer (also loads of people prefer laptops, which aren't great for PC gaming), you don't need much manual dexterity to pick up a game and be decent at it, and most importantly you can invite your friends round and you can all play together.
WoW (and similar games, but mainly WoW) have also become very popular. You can make friends very quickly, there's a lot of fun things to do in the gameworld, it's not too hard but you can still be better or worse at it than others, and if you play it a little bit, you'll want to put more time in so you can do more stuff later.
At the same time, there were a bunch of market experts who noticed this trend and started advising game producing companies on how to maximise profits. So now we see things like achievements. Achievements are basically a way turn a game into an RPG. You do something that's maybe a bit boring, time-consuming or just plain hard and at the end of it a big shiny box appears on the screen and tells you what a god damn baller you are - so subconciously you think "hmm this activity is worth it" and continue playing. In fact you continue playing until the next DLC or expansion comes out, and you are more likely to buy it. And all the time while you are pursuing the essentially pointless goal of having more big shiny boxes than your friends, you are a part of the game's community and helping to spread the word about this game, ensuring more people will buy it.
OK, so now back to Blizzard. Blizzard marketing employees have been to seminar where a man told them how to make shittons of money from games (why the makers of WoW listened to anyone but themselves is beyond me). So now we have achievements in Blizzard games, a frankly odd league system that tells you kind of how good you are but also how much you play in comparison to 99 random people who most likely you will never meet in game. We also have them employing a man who made the UI for a very successful console game to do it for SC2, and we have no LAN support because they are worried that someone will simply implement a better system than Battlenet and everyone will use that.
The problem is this: Blizzard have forgotten that they are Blizzard. They were a massively successful company before achievement points. They just don't operate on the same business model as the shitty console developer companies who use artificial means to keep players interested in and buying their games. People are still buying WC3, SC1 and D2! That is how Blizzard has always worked. They make such a damn good game that people are still buying and playing it 15 years on.
They employed that console UI guy for these reasons:
1. That the UIs he designed before were actually good, and not just better than previous console game UIs
2. That the success of that game was based on the UI
3. That a UI designed for consoles would be able to do a good job for PC
4. That there was a problem with the UIs of previous Blizzard titles.
They did not implement LAN for these reasons:
1. They were worried that an independent service such as hamachi, garena or ICCUP would spring up and supplant battle.net 2.0
2. That independant services such as these hurt sales and recognition of previous Blizzard titles.
3. That Battle.net 2.0 would be so bad that a small bunch of amateur progammers could do a better job (oh wait!)
Sorry for the rant.
TLDR: ofc i'm still gonna buy D3 and HotS, but i'll be very annoyed that my purchase of said games will validate Blizz's new ideas on how to make games.
|
On February 07 2012 18:39 Gurgl wrote:This is what Blizzard CM Bashiok had to say regarding the chatsystem for their upcoming game Diablo 3, which will be played on Battlenet 0.2 just like Starcraft 2. " It seems there’s been some confusion taken from the above statement I made back in September. The chat in Diablo III is exactly as I described, you do all of it in a single window. StarCraft II has a system where each chat is broken out into a separate window, chat program-style, but Diablo III keeps it all in one. The same single window that’s used for chat when you eventually jump into a game, too.
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. Most people that want chat channels though are referring to guild channels, or otherwise channels they themselves can operate and choose to invite others to, and we see those as completely valid forms of chat (there’s a social structure backing the channel). As I said, back in September, it’s unlikely to be anything we attain for ship, but the social group-type chat features are still very much a desire for the future. " The reason I post this here on the SC2 forum is because both D3 and SC2 players are in the same boat regarding being stuck on Battlenet 0.2. I thought this might interest some of you fellow Starcrafters who aren't following the D3 development, since it might be an indication of them not being very eager to improve the SC2 chat in the near future. I'm a Starcrafter myself but I'm also a big fan of the Diablo series. It seems they haven't taken the feedback from SC2 players regarding the terrible chatsystem very seriously since they are giving D3 players the same shitty system. Needless to say there are many D3 fans who are far from happy with this announcement. Can Blizzard do whatever they want and we'll still buy and play their games? or is there a way the Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 communities can unite and convince Blizzard to improve the chatsystem? We are in the same boat regarding this afterall. Bashioks original statement: http://blues.incgamers.com/Posts/10/1/40/819/147519/the-lack-of-a-general-chat-just-sucks#postId_399627
For some reason posts I have read in the past make me think that this post is 100% wrong.
Chat system will remain the same from WoL to HoTS.
Chat system in D3 will be more similar to WoW.
They haven't taken the feedback because the game is already sold....
Obviously they can do what the please. Think of almost every game company now. They just grind out games in shit quality for the big bucks. New COD every week. RPG expansions (not D3 as of yet) that are just a shell of the former game with some changed storyline, but an overall weaker and shorter game experience. People keep buying because they want a new fix, and these game companies want you to want a new fix. If I play D2 LOD 1000 times it doesn't earn them 1000 times the money, but if I purchase D1 through D1000 they do. I hope D3 rocks though cuz they sure did mess up with SC2
|
Diablo 3 not having public chat has more to do with forcing people to use the auction house, preferably the real money one.
|
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.
|
United States5162 Posts
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.
If all you want to do is play ladder, the system works great. If you want to do anything else, it's abysmal.
|
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.
Very well illustrated point and I have to say that I agree (to some extent)
I personally think that the UI is not the best for feeling like you are with a community of gamers in the game but the way it is designed still allows you to do the most basic and essential things you need. I would love to see improvements towards better chat channels, easier access to Online tournaments and generally features that were included in Battle.net 1.0.
I think it is good that the community is vocal about the issues with the new battle.net but I agree with you that it is by no means abysmal.
|
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.
And thats the problem, most of us (including me) will buy their product, and they can get away with their incompetence(i believe thats appropriate word), WoW, SC2 had multitude of problems that still didnt press the overall judgement of the product. Its like Cola company making new version of Coca Cola (worse) and because there is no Pepsi everyone will still drink it. They are just enjoying their monopoly.
|
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.
|
Sigh. All this shit just makes me happy I am old enough to have played Blizzard's older games when they were new. I feel sorry for kids who have to grow up with this mediocrity.
|
The only thing I really miss about the last incarnation of Battle.net is the automated touranments. That was fun. I'd really like to see that make a comeback.
At first I didn't like the idea of not having chat channels and it seemed to make the game feel more empty, but once they added chat channels and once I went and played other MP games with chat channels, I started to sympathize with Blizzard a lot more. The internet has always been somewhat of a cesspool in some regards, but it's gotten soooo much worse these last few years. It used to be that if you beat someone and they got a little salty or they owned you and had no manners they'd talk a little smack and that would be it. Now in that same situation people will tell you to go kill yourself because you're not good enough at a game, tell you that they hope your mom gets cancer, all kinds of garbage, chat channels are filled with racism, etc.
Guild/Clan/Whatever channels are great, and they should implement them in some sort of official way, but I totally understand Blizzard not wanting to have anything to do with public chat channels. Heck I'm a very outgoing person and *I* want as little interaction as possible with the general population of Battle.net.
|
just compare the chat in any stream there is on team liquid and the actual ingame sc2 general chat, something is wrong.
|
I'm actually not surprised, I mean they barely made BNET 2.0 better since SC2 release, I don't expect much to change anymore
|
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)
|
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.
|
Calgary25980 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.
|
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.
|
Calgary25980 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.
|
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.
One of the best things about SCBW bnet was indeed just chilling in the chat channel, talking about random stuff, then making an obs game with like 8 random people who didn't know each other, discuss the game with the 6 obs and maybe chat about movies or other games or whatever else, and then maybe add some friends to your friends list. You could never do that with SC2 and it's pretty sad as it was the best part about the experience to me at least
|
So much demonizing is happening in this thread T_T
So Blizzard puts in a feature you find annoying, stop being so dramatic. Blizzard cares about their fan base, and they listen to them more than almost any other company. Want to know how much EA responds to the community? Zilch. Nada. Zero. So hush up, our e-sport has one of the best developers in the world >:/
|
On February 07 2012 18:39 Gurgl wrote:
Can Blizzard do whatever they want and we'll still buy and play their games?
Annoying, but I know I'll buy it no matter what. It is annoying though, I feel like there is no reason for them to be doing such a poor job with battle.net in general.
What's worse is they can get people to get multiple copies so they can play in more than one region.
|
On February 08 2012 15:56 GhandiEAGLE wrote:
So much demonizing is happening in this thread T_T
So Blizzard puts in a feature you find annoying, stop being so dramatic. Blizzard cares about their fan base, and they listen to them more than almost any other company. Want to know how much EA responds to the community? Zilch. Nada. Zero. So hush up, our e-sport has one of the best developers in the world >:/
Can you justify this or provide any examples in regard to Battle.net 2.0?
|
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.
I think this is a good example of where the general SC2 community branches off from TL.net. Personally, I don't care for anything except private chat and ingame chat. There are much more like me, outside of TL, but most of TL ignores those people as "casuals" and claims unanimity.
|
On February 08 2012 15:56 GhandiEAGLE wrote:
So much demonizing is happening in this thread T_T
So Blizzard puts in a feature you find annoying, stop being so dramatic. Blizzard cares about their fan base, and they listen to them more than almost any other company. Want to know how much EA responds to the community? Zilch. Nada. Zero. So hush up, our e-sport has one of the best developers in the world >:/
Whats the point of choosing to compare Blizzard with someone worse?!
While you are at it talking about how other companies listen to their community, why don't you bring up Valve.
Do you know how much they listen to their community in Dota2? Every day I get more and more impressed on how Dota2 is being developed. For me they are the "new Blizzard", the one to look up to.
|
On February 08 2012 15:51 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 06:51 Chill wrote: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. One of the best things about SCBW bnet was indeed just chilling in the chat channel, talking about random stuff, then making an obs game with like 8 random people who didn't know each other, discuss the game with the 6 obs and maybe chat about movies or other games or whatever else, and then maybe add some friends to your friends list. You could never do that with SC2 and it's pretty sad as it was the best part about the experience to me at least
Do you (plural) join "private" channels? I have 3 or 4 different chat channels that I just chill in. A few practice channels and a 'local/regional' channel (@shikyo starcraft2.fi - it's a bit quiet but it's there). I'm able to find games for practice, warm-up, off racing or obsing. Sure it would be nice if blizzard added some user moderation capabilities but I still don't see why I would want to auto join channels that would be filled with trolls... (Also, some of the "blizzard channels" are active - or were last time I tried).
|
On February 08 2012 16:10 papaz wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 15:56 GhandiEAGLE wrote:
So much demonizing is happening in this thread T_T
So Blizzard puts in a feature you find annoying, stop being so dramatic. Blizzard cares about their fan base, and they listen to them more than almost any other company. Want to know how much EA responds to the community? Zilch. Nada. Zero. So hush up, our e-sport has one of the best developers in the world >:/ Whats the point of choosing to compare Blizzard with someone worse?! While you are at it talking about how other companies listen to their community, why don't you bring up Valve. Do you know how much they listen to their community in Dota2? Every day I get more and more impressed on how Dota2 is being developed. For me they are the "new Blizzard", the one to look up to.
Blizzard has long been left behind in regards to giving two shits about customer feedback. To me they seem akin to an artist who will make art for clients but get pissed if they give suggestions or criticism.
|
On February 08 2012 16:02 Jonoman92 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 18:39 Gurgl wrote:
Can Blizzard do whatever they want and we'll still buy and play their games?
Annoying, but I know I'll buy it no matter what. It is annoying though, I feel like there is no reason for them to be doing such a poor job with battle.net in general. What's worse is they can get people to get multiple copies so they can play in more than one region.
Same, ever since Warcraft 1, i played with every pc game Blizz made, and it was always quality, no question. Gonna keep playing them, tho i quitted WoW 2 years ago so cant comment on Cata and MoP
|
Every time a topic comes up w/ this subject, I get so mad b/c I'm so annoyed what blizzard has done to battle.net.
I just remember all the years and years playing SC1/WC3 and socializing w/ so many random people and making so many random internet friends within the game. I remember spending so much time sitting in clan channels or other random channels and just socializing with people. And now with SC2, it just feels so lonely and it's so much harder to make new random friends. SC2 just feels that it's all about ladder and nothing else (especially since the custom game system is crap).
|
Whelp, at least I only have one friend to communicate with so this won't really affect me. However, as time goes on battlenet 2.0 just keeps getting worse and worse. Like it's some kind of devious social experiment or something.
|
havent entered a chat room to chat and been playing since beta
|
In the end the most frustrating thing is that implementing chat channels is incredibly simple for blizzard, yet they continue to dig their feet in the ground and resist it. It would make the game much more social and enjoyable without being a huge time sink for them.
|
its not about 'an effective system of communication'...its about the sense of community that - for me and many other former d2/bw/wc3 players - has been lost. it's the idea of meeting new players and having discussions with complete strangers that love the same game as you do. as a 11/12 year old kid playing diablo 2, bnet 1.0 was basically my replacement for social interaction...i met some complete strangers and joined a clan, and as a kid i felt they had become my little e-family (haha). additionally, as i started getting into brood war and warcraft 3, the fact that all of your playing partners from all 3 games could join together in one chatroom was just...cool.
i think alot of people like me feel strongly nostalgic about the old bnet 1.0 system...and to the new guys who haven't experienced it...it's quite hard to explain.
the fact is that a communal chat system like bnet 1.0 is conducive to the continuing development of a game, as well as the individual development of its players, especially in a competitive RTS genre. it's a shame blizzard is basically ignoring the feedback.
|
I feel like many people who are posting did not read the whole thing
"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. Most people that want chat channels though are referring to guild channels, or otherwise channels they themselves can operate and choose to invite others to, and we see those as completely valid forms of chat (there’s a social structure backing the channel). As I said, back in September, it’s unlikely to be anything we attain for ship, but the social group-type chat features are still very much a desire for the future. "
They are saying that they are against including open public channels in D3 (these are in Starcraft II, "General" "Looking for custom game", "Looking for Team" etc), and ARE going to support guild channels (although that may come "soon"). Basically they are saying that operated channels will be coming. We have private channels in Starcraft II but not Operated private channels, we can assume that operated channels will come at the same time that D3 gets operated channels.
So if you are complaining about the lack of chat channels to talk to your friends you have misread or not read what they are saying. There are many active private channels in SC2, if you haven't found any you just haven't taken the time to look.
|
On February 08 2012 15:56 GhandiEAGLE wrote:
Blizzard cares about their fan base, and they listen to them more than almost any other company
So hush up
ummmmm what? How can they listen to us if we dont say anything?
|
It's only been recently that the huge threads and rants about Battle.net 2.0 have picked up steam again. I remember one thread that had some interest but it's just now that this "campaign" from a large audience has sprung up. Yes it's been brought up many times before but I can't recall a time when 4 or 5 threads on TL alone were created in the same time frame discussing the issue. Keep knocking on Blizzard's door and they'll listen. In the first 2 years, the game has undergone drastic improvement in the most important area, gameplay. It's easy to feel like complaints fall on deaf ears when official responses aren't made regarding an issue. That is something I wish they would do more often on their own forums.
Despite the sometimes absent communication, I don't think it's in their best interest to simply ignore a large chunk of the community. It doesn't make sense fiscally, let alone design-wise. If they start consistently dropping the ball and don't deliver on anything, then they'll be in trouble. Blizzard is one of those companies that takes its time on everything it does. It's not known for making games over night or speeding to change everything. That being said, they aren't stupid and in a time where people rage about the smallest of mistakes, you can be certain they have more than enough feedback to get features added. Be willing to be assertive about what you want changed but in the meantime don't let something you want changed spoil the rest. If it's too much to deal with and you don't want to play with a game lacking what you feel are integral features, quit. I did it with WoW when I thought they abandoned their formula in Wrath. The game got so ridiculously simple and the team aspect died off. As much as I enjoyed the game and didn't want to have to quit, the game had turned into something I didn't enjoy anymore. I made sure to lobby my side of the argument but in the end it wasn't something that was addressed and still hasn't been. Same could be said for SC2 now, if there is a point where I feel the game lacks what it needs to be a game I can enjoy, I will stop playing until they fix it (that might never happen). I do, however, have faith enough in Blizzard to follow through with what they promise. If a day comes when they flat out never own up to something and it becomes a trend, I'll simply stop giving them my money. Much like I did with the Call of Duty franchise. I played the shit out of vanilla CoD and was extremely into the competitve side of the game. That died off in the franchise...needless to say, I don't buy new games from them anymore. It's sad that it came to that but at the end of the day, it wasn't the franchise I remembered it for and thus it needed to be abandoned.
Keep voicing opinions but the more malicious they become, the more deaf the ears suddenly are. Constructive criticism is always going to yield better results even if it's the 500th time you've mentioned the same thing.
|
On February 08 2012 07:47 CoR wrote:
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)
First off, you can't make a smurf in this game regardless(unless you want to buy another account). So if Mr.Johnson wants to spam you for 5 seconds before you can block him, that is fine. If he is dumb enough to spend $60 on another account so he can get 5 seconds of "Fuck Yous" in, that's fine.
Second off, you're bringing in shit that isn't feasibly possible due to how an account is set up on SC2. Will anyone buy 50x accounts and some proxies just to spam channels? Highly unlikely.
So in your opinion, it's better to have an open chat channel where people can spew bullshit all day long, opposed to one that can be moderated? If I have a clan channel, it's my choice who I want in. If you don't like it, there's public channels and other private channels that may want you.
|
maybe someone mentioned it already but i couldnt see but, WoW uses a single panel chat interface, and based on the fact that d3 is just a wow clone im 90% sure the chat will be the same. for those that dont know in wow, you have your chat menu which lists your channels in it. it will say [1. general] or [2. trade] before the words so you know which number to /x to use that channel and to leave it quickly. when you receive a pm in wow it comes up in either purple (with char name for in game /w) or in light blue (with real name for real id) you then have your party or raid and guild in different colours using the same format as above.
you are able to move different channels and private conversations to other 'tabs' of the same window similar. overall its a much better system than sc2 chat and for a game like diablo where theres a world around you its obviously required for there to be some kind of permanent chat pressence.
some people have said that "chat is part of battlenet so it wont change" while this is true, that the chat server is completely unrelated to the game server, its worth pointing out that currently the way sc2 and wow take and use that battle net chat data is very different, as outlined above. theres nothing you could read into comments made about diablo that have any baring on sc2.
|
He seems to support the idea of player-made and player-moderated channels, but not public channels.
I'm okay with this. What's the problem?
|
On February 08 2012 19:29 turdburgler wrote:
maybe someone mentioned it already but i couldnt see but, WoW uses a single panel chat interface, and based on the fact that d3 is just a wow clone im 90% sure the chat will be the same. for those that dont know in wow, you have your chat menu which lists your channels in it. it will say [1. general] or [2. trade] before the words so you know which number to /x to use that channel and to leave it quickly. when you receive a pm in wow it comes up in either purple (with char name for in game /w) or in light blue (with real name for real id) you then have your party or raid and guild in different colours using the same format as above.
you are able to move different channels and private conversations to other 'tabs' of the same window similar. overall its a much better system than sc2 chat and for a game like diablo where theres a world around you its obviously required for there to be some kind of permanent chat pressence.
some people have said that "chat is part of battlenet so it wont change" while this is true, that the chat server is completely unrelated to the game server, its worth pointing out that currently the way sc2 and wow take and use that battle net chat data is very different, as outlined above. theres nothing you could read into comments made about diablo that have any baring on sc2.
Blizzard hit the nail on the head with WOW. There's no denying that how they have the chat set up is the only feasible way possible for a game such as WOW.
D3 has just a few people in each game though. The reason people are worried is D2 is just like SC and WC as far as chat goes. They're revamping D3's chat system to a shitty interface, and if they're doing that on a brand new game, despite customer feedback, I see no reason why they would change HOTS chat. At this point, the only way to get our point across is boycott their future products(HOTS, D3, etc).
On February 08 2012 19:34 Dhalphir wrote:
He seems to support the idea of player-made and player-moderated channels, but not public channels.
I'm okay with this. What's the problem?
The problem comes down to an alienated community. Trading channels, etc are gone. How many casual gamers are going to know about teamliquid and other forums? Not too many. They're now secluded to an awful interface where they can't trade beyond an auction house. Maybe that's the point to them... more money in their pocket possibly.
|
On February 08 2012 19:34 Dhalphir wrote:
He seems to support the idea of player-made and player-moderated channels, but not public channels.
I'm okay with this. What's the problem?
Player-made channels create closed communities. They may spawn new communities of their own, but being subsets of the initial player community, they'll usually be small or short-lived or both.
Public channels create vibrant, open communities. They can spawn new communities which can potentially include all players, all interests, all attitudes, and they're a source for a constant influx of new people.
|
Oh, so they don't see public chat channels as necessary? That thing Sc2 players moaned and groaned for until it finally got included?
Makes sense.
|
On February 07 2012 22:06 Noobity wrote:
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.
You may be in the majority on this website of people who are dedicated to the game. However in the pool of total players I would say you're in the minority. Just look at the numbers that play vs that at release. Look at your friends list.
I have a lot of friends that played BW and WC3 since they came out until SC2 came out. We all got SC2 and were very excited about the game. Six months after launch my list that had been full of people at release was totally dead. They all played through the single player and then saw that BNET had nothing more to offer them except ladder and moved on to other games.
Most are playing DOTA2 if they got a key and if not they are playing LoL while waiting for a DOTA2 key. Several including myself prefer the game of Starcraft to DOTA but the features of DOTA2, a game in BETA I might add, make it a much more enjoyable experience overall.
|
I would like a better system, the way it assums you want to chat in lobby chat everytime you enter a lobby is especially annoying, leave me to type in the chatbox i am already in!
|
On February 09 2012 02:31 Shockk wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 19:34 Dhalphir wrote:
He seems to support the idea of player-made and player-moderated channels, but not public channels.
I'm okay with this. What's the problem? Player-made channels create closed communities. They may spawn new communities of their own, but being subsets of the initial player community, they'll usually be small or short-lived or both. Public channels create vibrant, open communities. They can spawn new communities which can potentially include all players, all interests, all attitudes, and they're a source for a constant influx of new people.
On the old battle.net, the only public communities were those you stumbled upon typing random things into chat channels. Otherwise, it was a public chat full of spam bots. Stop spreading this fantasy that forced chat somehow "builds community."
|
On February 09 2012 03:05 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 02:31 Shockk wrote:On February 08 2012 19:34 Dhalphir wrote:
He seems to support the idea of player-made and player-moderated channels, but not public channels.
I'm okay with this. What's the problem? Player-made channels create closed communities. They may spawn new communities of their own, but being subsets of the initial player community, they'll usually be small or short-lived or both. Public channels create vibrant, open communities. They can spawn new communities which can potentially include all players, all interests, all attitudes, and they're a source for a constant influx of new people. On the old battle.net, the only public communities were those you stumbled upon typing random things into chat channels. Otherwise, it was a public chat full of spam bots. Stop spreading this fantasy that forced chat somehow "builds community."
Noone's denying that the old chat system wasn't perfect. But instead of working on the issues - e.g. finding a way to deal with bots - Blizzard just scrapped the system completely. Which would have been fine had they provided a decent alternative, but they haven't.
In the end, a substantial part of the discussion is highly subjective, as everyone used chat differently. Please note that while your experience with chat may not have been that great, there's a larger number of users that think differently, as is evident with all the UI threads and the support they're receiving.
You may not agree with the threads' notion, but at least respect our opinion. It's not just nostalgia, trust me. For some people, the chat model of SC/BW and WC3 actually did create a feeling of community which is missing from SC2, and will apparently also be missing from D3.
|
On February 09 2012 03:05 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 02:31 Shockk wrote:On February 08 2012 19:34 Dhalphir wrote:
He seems to support the idea of player-made and player-moderated channels, but not public channels.
I'm okay with this. What's the problem? Player-made channels create closed communities. They may spawn new communities of their own, but being subsets of the initial player community, they'll usually be small or short-lived or both. Public channels create vibrant, open communities. They can spawn new communities which can potentially include all players, all interests, all attitudes, and they're a source for a constant influx of new people. On the old battle.net, the only public communities were those you stumbled upon typing random things into chat channels. Otherwise, it was a public chat full of spam bots. Stop spreading this fantasy that forced chat somehow "builds community."
I don't know about you, but I know when I type in random channels, I think of shit like "clan x17". :sigh:
So the spam bots that spammed channels 24/7 that created large communities is just a fantasy? I specifically remember trolling around in Clan Recruitment, and seeing a shit ton of channels spammed. Clan OD which comes to mind, and still exists in SC2 was one of them. Without these public channels, I would have never heard of them.
|
On February 08 2012 19:34 Dhalphir wrote:
He seems to support the idea of player-made and player-moderated channels, but not public channels.
I'm okay with this. What's the problem?
He also says they won't be there for ship, so we have to deal with the traditional "on the way" routine from Blizzard while we wait for their implementation of a feature that will probably end up again being half-assed compared to our expectations.
|
On February 07 2012 18:39 Gurgl wrote:
As I said, back in September, it’s unlikely to be anything we attain for ship, but the social group-type chat features are still very much a desire for the future.
How are people missing this point.. the game isn't about to be shipped, but they're already saying a chat channel is something that's not likely to ship?? WTF How lazy have they gotten, that's a serious question. A social game that can't ship with social functions but the developers will look to do it in the future? Just admit out loud your releasing a half finished game and be done with it. They released SC2's battle net half done, and it looks to be the same for D3.
|
He basically just laid out Blizzard's viewpoint on open chat channels with "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." I, for one, mostly agree with them. I don't care about open chat channels. They are basically worthless and a hang out spot for trolls and people with too much time on their hands (not mutually exclusive). Go to the open chat in something like Dota 2. Its only real use is determining whether the servers are fucked up or not (and its not even that great at that). Otherwise, its terrible, because its just random crap, because it has 0 moderation and it is the internet.
Obviously, most people seem disagree with this (in theory), and bitch about wanting open chat channels like B.net 1.0. The funny thing is you are on the Team Liquid forums, and if I had to guess, you are here because of the very solid moderation that goes on around here. There is a reason the battle.net forums suck, and it is because the sparse and loose moderation leads to almost unmitigated crap.
Moderation = good, no moderation = bad. As far as personally moderated channels goes, yes that is a good thing and something they plan to implement.
You can bitch about it all you want, and say Blizzard "isn't listening to their core audience" or however you want to term it, but they have made a stance, and it is a stance that is rooted in modern internet reality: open chat channels suck balls (go to a live stream chat if you need proof). They are making the game, you aren't, and you'll still probably buy it.
|
On February 09 2012 04:27 HardlyNever wrote:
He basically just laid out Blizzard's viewpoint on open chat channels with "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." I, for one, mostly agree with them. I don't care about open chat channels. They are basically worthless and a hang out spot for trolls and people with too much time on their hands (not mutually exclusive). Go to the open chat in something like Dota 2. Its only real use is determining whether the servers are fucked up or not (and its not even that great at that). Otherwise, its terrible, because its just random crap, because it has 0 moderation and it is the internet.
Obviously, most people seem disagree with this (in theory), and bitch about wanting open chat channels like B.net 1.0. The funny thing is you are on the Team Liquid forums, and if I had to guess, you are here because of the very solid moderation that goes on around here. There is a reason the battle.net forums suck, and it is because the sparse and loose moderation leads to almost unmitigated crap.
Moderation = good, no moderation = bad. As far as personally moderated channels goes, yes that is a good thing and something they plan to implement.
You can bitch about it all you want, and say Blizzard "isn't listening to their core audience" or however you want to term it, but they have made a stance, and it is a stance that is rooted in modern internet reality: open chat channels suck balls (go to a live stream chat if you need proof). They are making the game, you aren't, and you'll still probably buy it.
Completely agree here, I think a lot of people who are complaining didn't read the blizzard quote. There are some that want open chat channels but most people here are talking about guild channels, even though that was directly addressed in the article.
There are many private and public channels on Starcraft 2, sure we are lacking a guild system, but there are many chat channels that are very active right now, you just have to go look for them.
|
I don't know if you typing Battle.net 0.2 was a mistake or on purpose, but I love it none the less! ^_^
|
On February 09 2012 02:46 Disconnect wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 22:06 Noobity wrote:
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.
You may be in the majority on this website of people who are dedicated to the game. However in the pool of total players I would say you're in the minority. Just look at the numbers that play vs that at release. Look at your friends list. I have a lot of friends that played BW and WC3 since they came out until SC2 came out. We all got SC2 and were very excited about the game. Six months after launch my list that had been full of people at release was totally dead. They all played through the single player and then saw that BNET had nothing more to offer them except ladder and moved on to other games. Most are playing DOTA2 if they got a key and if not they are playing LoL while waiting for a DOTA2 key. Several including myself prefer the game of Starcraft to DOTA but the features of DOTA2, a game in BETA I might add, make it a much more enjoyable experience overall.
If I may .. I'm just curious as to why a lot of people seem to be implying that going from SC2 to Dota2/HoN/LoL is a logical step. (Not the quoted post exactly, but it's the latest one that mentions it.) Totally different genre of game, totally different skillset, to me it's kind of like saying "Lots of people are jumping ship from WoW to Street Fighter X Tekken!"
The rest of the UI in Diablo 3 is top-notch and I have no doubt that the HotS UI will be as well. Blizzard UIs have always been top-notch despite little inconsistencies here and there. The lack of public chat channels doesn't bother me. It bothered me a little bit when they first announced it for SC2, but after they eventually added chat channels I used them for a couple weeks and then haven't touched them since. Most of my SC2 or gaming in general related communication these days is done via Skype. I'm probably in the minority though in that I don't play SC2 as a social experience, I join a random game, fight a random person, and move on to the next person and never really have any social interaction with them other than "gl hf" and "gg"
|
imo really emberassing they are still stuck in bnet 0.2
i dont get it...is it so hard? :O
|
Updated OP with new great information, good job SC2 and D3 community!
Good sign for SC2 chat in HOTS? :p
|
Just saw his newest post. If they're putting Chat channels in D3 there's really no reason to not just copy the feature over to HoTS. They both use Bnet 2.0 after all! Either way their stance on it in general appears to have changed and Bashiok was completely unaware. Maybe some of the feedback reached the higher ups. Thread may need a title change!
|
On February 09 2012 18:13 xBillehx wrote:
Just saw his newest post. If they're putting Chat channels in D3 there's really no reason to not just copy the feature over to HoTS. They both use Bnet 2.0 after all! Either way their stance on it in general appears to have changed and Bashiok was completely unaware. Maybe some of the feedback reached the higher ups. Thread may need a title change!
Do you really believe that Bashiok was unaware? He himself told that channels were already implemented in September (even if he some days ago claimed that his post was misunderstood by the community). More likely somebody higher-up had decided after September that the chat channels would not be included in the game. And now they just reversed that decision.
|
In case nobody saw...
Bashiok wrote:
Soooooo... hey everyone. How's it going? Good? Weather ok? Great... so, right... You know how sometimes you say something that's stupid and wrong and then people very reasonably get upset and create a lot of threads and discussions and demands with some pretty reasonable reasons for the thing you said wouldn't happen but then it turns out that you're stupid and wrong and the things you said are completely the opposite of what's actually true?
Yeah. So that happened. Public chat channels will be in Diablo III, barring any catastrophe that requires we remove them, because they're already implemented. In fact they'll be in an upcoming beta patch so you'll get to see and play around with them yourselves.
I'm not sure I can offer any explanation as to the incorrectness of my statements, except that I believed them to be correct when I made them. I apologize, and I'll strive to not be stupid and wrong in the future.
More info on the chat feature, and others, to come in the weeks ahead. Thanks for sticking with it, and me.
|
I'm pretty happy with the current chat system and I think it will make a good addition to Diablo 3.
|
On February 07 2012 18:44 taitanik wrote:
im happy with chat system and i dont see nothing bad in it when i turn on sc2 i play when i need to chat with someone im not having any trouble
I hate to say it, but these kinds of responses frighten me the most, and this is the exact reason why Blizzard can expect to get away with an underdeveloped BattleNet 2.0, which is: The new consumers don't have the experiences and good memories that veterans like a lot of us have with the old BattleNet. The people who cringe at the reasons/excuses that Blizzard is giving out pertaining to how general chats, etc can be abused are the same people who have had no experience with said chat system other than Starcraft 2, and perhaps WoW (though I can't say for sure because I only played this game for a month before I got tired of it) both of which work but are extremely dumbed down versions of the original BattleNet.
|
So chat channels confirmed,.
|
On February 09 2012 17:25 Gurgl wrote:
Updated OP with new great information, good job SC2 and D3 community!
Good sign for SC2 chat in HOTS? :p
Good job? What do you think you did?
|
Blizzard could rule the market if they continue making good games. I do not see why they would not include public chat and other wanted features. Good step forward by implementing this.
|
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.
Tell everyone you know to actually go out and buy PC games then, because as it stands the PC market doesn't even compare to the console one so developers choose to focus where it matters more.
|
I think the chat system is a piece of shit and that we should bring back the Battle.net 1.0 system where its all-in-one. This would never happen, though. Because HERP DERP, WE NEED FACEBOOK INTEGRATION OVER EVERYTHING ELSE IN SC1.
|
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.
You have a reasonable opinion, but I don't think you understand how much larger the console market is. It's really not even close.
|
On February 10 2012 02:35 skipdog172 wrote:In case nobody saw... Bashiok wrote: Show nested quote +Soooooo... hey everyone. How's it going? Good? Weather ok? Great... so, right... You know how sometimes you say something that's stupid and wrong and then people very reasonably get upset and create a lot of threads and discussions and demands with some pretty reasonable reasons for the thing you said wouldn't happen but then it turns out that you're stupid and wrong and the things you said are completely the opposite of what's actually true?
Yeah. So that happened. Public chat channels will be in Diablo III, barring any catastrophe that requires we remove them, because they're already implemented. In fact they'll be in an upcoming beta patch so you'll get to see and play around with them yourselves.
I'm not sure I can offer any explanation as to the incorrectness of my statements, except that I believed them to be correct when I made them. I apologize, and I'll strive to not be stupid and wrong in the future.
More info on the chat feature, and others, to come in the weeks ahead. Thanks for sticking with it, and me.
Bashiok only misspoke if his superiors misspoke, because his superiors have to sign off on pretty much everything he says on the topic.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/7Xn4w.jpg)
That's the way Blizzard works now. I like Bashiok, I've talked productively with him on the forums, but I'm hard-pressed to believe that any misinformation that came out of the company was some kind of "casual mistake", as is portrayed in his post, because I guarantee you that post had to be signed off on as well.
|
Something is wrong with Blizzard.
Just grow a pair and get this shit done.
|
meh... people make such a big deal out of chat channels that it's pretty irrelevant when we already have IRC. What we have now is definitely acceptable and I really don't care if they improve it or not. I'm much more concerned with other things that have been present in previous blizzard games but aren't in SC2.
|
Lol the thing is even if they end up not following the community's advice on fixes, the majority of the people would still pay for the games. This isn't in the early gaming industry where a boycott was actually something to be taken seriously. Once a company have monopolized the scene, there is little to nothing that the consumers can act on.
|
On February 10 2012 08:45 MichaelJLowell wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2012 02:35 skipdog172 wrote:In case nobody saw... Bashiok wrote: Soooooo... hey everyone. How's it going? Good? Weather ok? Great... so, right... You know how sometimes you say something that's stupid and wrong and then people very reasonably get upset and create a lot of threads and discussions and demands with some pretty reasonable reasons for the thing you said wouldn't happen but then it turns out that you're stupid and wrong and the things you said are completely the opposite of what's actually true?
Yeah. So that happened. Public chat channels will be in Diablo III, barring any catastrophe that requires we remove them, because they're already implemented. In fact they'll be in an upcoming beta patch so you'll get to see and play around with them yourselves.
I'm not sure I can offer any explanation as to the incorrectness of my statements, except that I believed them to be correct when I made them. I apologize, and I'll strive to not be stupid and wrong in the future.
More info on the chat feature, and others, to come in the weeks ahead. Thanks for sticking with it, and me. Bashiok only misspoke if his superiors misspoke, because his superiors have to sign off on pretty much everything he says on the topic. That's the way Blizzard works now. I like Bashiok, I've talked productively with him on the forums, but I'm hard-pressed to believe that any misinformation that came out of the company was some kind of "casual mistake", as is portrayed in his post, because I guarantee you that post had to be signed off on as well.
No, thats not the way blizzard works now. Just because you say it is, doesnt make it so. If he had to have his superiors sign off on everything he says, then his superiors may as well be posting as him.
|
I accept his apology, but then I wasn't one of the people getting all upset over chat channels. I'm also inclined to believe him if chat channels will be in the/a upcoming patch. With how long it took to implement them for SC2 I doubt they could change their mind for D3 and implement them that fast. Mistakes happen.
|
On February 10 2012 10:00 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2012 08:45 MichaelJLowell wrote:On February 10 2012 02:35 skipdog172 wrote:In case nobody saw... Bashiok wrote: Soooooo... hey everyone. How's it going? Good? Weather ok? Great... so, right... You know how sometimes you say something that's stupid and wrong and then people very reasonably get upset and create a lot of threads and discussions and demands with some pretty reasonable reasons for the thing you said wouldn't happen but then it turns out that you're stupid and wrong and the things you said are completely the opposite of what's actually true?
Yeah. So that happened. Public chat channels will be in Diablo III, barring any catastrophe that requires we remove them, because they're already implemented. In fact they'll be in an upcoming beta patch so you'll get to see and play around with them yourselves.
I'm not sure I can offer any explanation as to the incorrectness of my statements, except that I believed them to be correct when I made them. I apologize, and I'll strive to not be stupid and wrong in the future.
More info on the chat feature, and others, to come in the weeks ahead. Thanks for sticking with it, and me. Bashiok only misspoke if his superiors misspoke, because his superiors have to sign off on pretty much everything he says on the topic. That's the way Blizzard works now. I like Bashiok, I've talked productively with him on the forums, but I'm hard-pressed to believe that any misinformation that came out of the company was some kind of "casual mistake", as is portrayed in his post, because I guarantee you that post had to be signed off on as well. No, thats not the way blizzard works now. Just because you say it is, doesnt make it so. If he had to have his superiors sign off on everything he says, then his superiors may as well be posting as him.
You dont talk about major features being in or out without confirmation from superiors. It's pretty simple when you're the mouthpiece you get your marching orders from the devs themselves on key things like that. Someone had a change of heart after the backlash, again. CMs most likely have a guide of stuff they can generally say so they dont have to constantly talk to the team about mundane things.
|
On February 10 2012 08:40 hmunkey wrote:Show nested quote +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. Tell everyone you know to actually go out and buy PC games then, because as it stands the PC market doesn't even compare to the console one so developers choose to focus where it matters more.
Neither does the amount of investment from developers though. A company can nurture a market not just exploit it. There's about 100 million combined xbox 360s and PS3s in the market. There's easily over 10 times as many PCs. Granted almost everyone with a console wants to play and purchase video games and the same can't b e said for people with a pc. BUT, either way you spin it there's still vast amounts of money to be made from pc games development. To many developers are taking the easier ride (smartphones and consoles) or too busy looking under their bed for pirates to reap the rewards the PC platform has to offer. Still, one persons loss is another persons gain.
|
It was a terrible decision to hire xbox developers to make bnet 2.0. They have absolutely no idea what made the PC community what it is today, and bnet 1.0 is one of the systems that got it right. They're more concerned about making things "metro" and "pretty" which in reality is not very functional to a regular PC gamer.
It works well for xbox just due to the nature of how the dashboard is something you boot up to, party up with friends, and not spend a lot of time on. You quickly boot straight into the game itself usually. PC gaming is more centralized around clans, guilds, and the community in general. You can't apply both ideas to both.
It surprises me that no one has brought this up to revamp bnet 0.2 to more similar what WC3 had. That was a wonderful system.
|
On February 10 2012 10:28 Serpico wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2012 10:00 TheRabidDeer wrote:On February 10 2012 08:45 MichaelJLowell wrote:On February 10 2012 02:35 skipdog172 wrote:In case nobody saw... Bashiok wrote: Soooooo... hey everyone. How's it going? Good? Weather ok? Great... so, right... You know how sometimes you say something that's stupid and wrong and then people very reasonably get upset and create a lot of threads and discussions and demands with some pretty reasonable reasons for the thing you said wouldn't happen but then it turns out that you're stupid and wrong and the things you said are completely the opposite of what's actually true?
Yeah. So that happened. Public chat channels will be in Diablo III, barring any catastrophe that requires we remove them, because they're already implemented. In fact they'll be in an upcoming beta patch so you'll get to see and play around with them yourselves.
I'm not sure I can offer any explanation as to the incorrectness of my statements, except that I believed them to be correct when I made them. I apologize, and I'll strive to not be stupid and wrong in the future.
More info on the chat feature, and others, to come in the weeks ahead. Thanks for sticking with it, and me. Bashiok only misspoke if his superiors misspoke, because his superiors have to sign off on pretty much everything he says on the topic. That's the way Blizzard works now. I like Bashiok, I've talked productively with him on the forums, but I'm hard-pressed to believe that any misinformation that came out of the company was some kind of "casual mistake", as is portrayed in his post, because I guarantee you that post had to be signed off on as well. No, thats not the way blizzard works now. Just because you say it is, doesnt make it so. If he had to have his superiors sign off on everything he says, then his superiors may as well be posting as him. You dont talk about major features being in or out without confirmation from superiors. It's pretty simple when you're the mouthpiece you get your marching orders from the devs themselves on key things like that. Someone had a change of heart after the backlash, again. CMs most likely have a guide of stuff they can generally say so they dont have to constantly talk to the team about mundane things.
You would be surprised. Until you can come up with proof that blizzard changed their hearts, it is another CM oops moment. I dont know if you will know/remember, but a CM has lost his job in the past because of things he has said, so it wouldnt be the first time.
|
Make it customizable will be great.
|
On February 10 2012 10:57 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2012 10:28 Serpico wrote:On February 10 2012 10:00 TheRabidDeer wrote:On February 10 2012 08:45 MichaelJLowell wrote:On February 10 2012 02:35 skipdog172 wrote:In case nobody saw... Bashiok wrote: Soooooo... hey everyone. How's it going? Good? Weather ok? Great... so, right... You know how sometimes you say something that's stupid and wrong and then people very reasonably get upset and create a lot of threads and discussions and demands with some pretty reasonable reasons for the thing you said wouldn't happen but then it turns out that you're stupid and wrong and the things you said are completely the opposite of what's actually true?
Yeah. So that happened. Public chat channels will be in Diablo III, barring any catastrophe that requires we remove them, because they're already implemented. In fact they'll be in an upcoming beta patch so you'll get to see and play around with them yourselves.
I'm not sure I can offer any explanation as to the incorrectness of my statements, except that I believed them to be correct when I made them. I apologize, and I'll strive to not be stupid and wrong in the future.
More info on the chat feature, and others, to come in the weeks ahead. Thanks for sticking with it, and me. Bashiok only misspoke if his superiors misspoke, because his superiors have to sign off on pretty much everything he says on the topic. That's the way Blizzard works now. I like Bashiok, I've talked productively with him on the forums, but I'm hard-pressed to believe that any misinformation that came out of the company was some kind of "casual mistake", as is portrayed in his post, because I guarantee you that post had to be signed off on as well. No, thats not the way blizzard works now. Just because you say it is, doesnt make it so. If he had to have his superiors sign off on everything he says, then his superiors may as well be posting as him. You dont talk about major features being in or out without confirmation from superiors. It's pretty simple when you're the mouthpiece you get your marching orders from the devs themselves on key things like that. Someone had a change of heart after the backlash, again. CMs most likely have a guide of stuff they can generally say so they dont have to constantly talk to the team about mundane things. You would be surprised. Until you can come up with proof that blizzard changed their hearts, it is another CM oops moment. I dont know if you will know/remember, but a CM has lost his job in the past because of things he has said, so it wouldnt be the first time.
Perhaps thats why they might need to get their posts approved first, sounds reasonable.
|
Have blizzards noob developers ever heard of IRC???
Yeah lets remake the wheel. Instead of making it round. We'll make it square. That's just more modern.
|
It's kind of sad to see Blizzard take several steps backwards in some areas of their game development. Some of the developer perceptions are so disjointed from the user base's.
However, there are very few games with the level of replayability that broodwar/wc3 had because of battle.net and custom maps. To think, even with a shitty battle.net, the replayability factor is still really high because of the polish and production they put into their games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
