|
On April 16 2012 13:04 FairForever wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 13:00 Spicy_Curry wrote:On April 16 2012 12:08 Capulet wrote:
It's not as simple as allowing one account to have 4 different MMRs, one for each race + random. I'm sure there are problems we are overlooking. For one thing, how would you account for GM league when a player like TLO can easily get GM with all 3 races? only one battletag allowed in gm would solve that problem Buying a second account would solve the MMR problem too. People like me have bought multiple accounts to play multiple races. Why would Blizzard limit their revenue?
Well obviously you've already bought another account so of course you don't care about this.
Point is you shouldn't need to buy multiple copies of the game to manually circumvent serious flaws in the matchmaking system. If the point of the system is to pair you against people of similar skill levels, then it absolutely fails in doing that when players can have vastly different skill levels with different races. It only works if you choose to either keep all your races at a similar skill level or stick to a single race at a time. The system shouldn't be dependent on us to help it function correctly. As I see it, they certainly have some obligation to fix that.
|
It would be pretty nice to have, but it's not completely nessicary.
I've switched races a few times since I was a bronzie, it turned out well.
Maybe it's because I played random often in team games.
|
On April 16 2012 13:51 fengshaun wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 13:37 dgwow wrote:On February 27 2012 06:45 esotericc wrote:On February 27 2012 05:56 Spicy_Curry wrote:
the technology isnt there yet Came here to post this, if people haven't realized yet I will make this extremely clear. Blizzard just simply doesn't care what you want, they like having the model that if you want a separate ladder ranking you need to buy the game again. Blizzard has little to no interest in catering to communities needs in battlenet. I usually wouldn't be so pessimistic on the matter but this has been talked to death in a billion threads. Blizzard just simply isn't going to do it. As much as I would agree with Blizzard being a profit-modeled organization right now, I don't think that many people purchase extra copies of starcraft just for a new ladder rank. Seems like a change that should be made. Like the Blizzard employee responded, there needs to be a large, concentrated and noticeable amount of feedback for change to be done. ^^^^ This! I've just sent a feedback to Bliz. Why don't you guys take a few second and do it too? And you can refer to this thread! I have also taken the time to make a petition for this. If you care about this issue, sign the petition so we have something to show Bliz: http://www.change.org/petitions/blizzard-entertainment-starcraft-ii-add-separate-mmrs-placement-matches-for-different-1v1-races
Is that your real name or did you just signed with your username ? ^^ Not a big fan of typing my personal stuff everywhere on the internet.
|
On April 16 2012 13:58 probob wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 13:51 fengshaun wrote:On April 16 2012 13:37 dgwow wrote:On February 27 2012 06:45 esotericc wrote:On February 27 2012 05:56 Spicy_Curry wrote:
the technology isnt there yet Came here to post this, if people haven't realized yet I will make this extremely clear. Blizzard just simply doesn't care what you want, they like having the model that if you want a separate ladder ranking you need to buy the game again. Blizzard has little to no interest in catering to communities needs in battlenet. I usually wouldn't be so pessimistic on the matter but this has been talked to death in a billion threads. Blizzard just simply isn't going to do it. As much as I would agree with Blizzard being a profit-modeled organization right now, I don't think that many people purchase extra copies of starcraft just for a new ladder rank. Seems like a change that should be made. Like the Blizzard employee responded, there needs to be a large, concentrated and noticeable amount of feedback for change to be done. ^^^^ This! I've just sent a feedback to Bliz. Why don't you guys take a few second and do it too? And you can refer to this thread! I have also taken the time to make a petition for this. If you care about this issue, sign the petition so we have something to show Bliz: http://www.change.org/petitions/blizzard-entertainment-starcraft-ii-add-separate-mmrs-placement-matches-for-different-1v1-races Is that your real name or did you just signed with your username ? ^^ Not a big fan of typing my personal stuff everywhere on the internet.
It shouldn't matter whether you use your username or real name to sign, as long as there is a signature! And that would be my username broken into a first name and a last name!
|
|
|
Separate ladder ranks would be a nice idea. I have no plans in switching from Zerg full-time, so it's not a *huge* deal, but I really would like to try a bit of Terran and Protoss out just for fun, and playing Customs really just don't feel the same to me. I don't get that rush of adrenaline, which is a huge reason I play SC2 in the first place.
If there were separate ladder ranks, I could off-race comfortably for a few games when I'm on a big losing streak on my "main."
Furthermore, this really doesn't seem like it'd be overly expensive for Blizzard to do? What do I know, no experience in this field.
|
On April 16 2012 10:23 Liquid`NonY wrote:
How is a natural solution unrealistic? Either it's not natural or it's not a solution. Your writing is very unclear there.
I don't understand why you make a point about buying three copies of the game. Just because owning multiple copies of a game yields some new benefit does not mean that that benefit is something that ought to be enjoyed by people owning one copy of that game. This seems incredibly obvious to me for multiplayer games and yet you point out that it's a multiplayer benefit as if that makes it more absurd. I think the more absurd thing would be an advantage to owning multiple copies of a game for offline or single player modes.
In World of Warcraft, owning one copy of the game allows you to make multiple characters but not play them simultaneously. There are good reasons for this that I believe most MMO players respect enough that they do not protest the extra costs. They accept that people owning multiple copies of the game can experience and do things that people owning one copy cannot. Are those activities and experiences part of the game?
The thing that is logically indefensible here is a definition of what it means to "get everything out of [the game]". Noting that some benefit is possible with multiple copies of the game and impossible without multiple copies of the game does not give much insight.
You bought SC2 with the expectation that Blizzard was going to continue to add new features and content to the game via free patches. You think this feature qualifies as something that Blizzard should patch in. Make an argument to convince them to patch it in. Making a hypothetical argument as to why they haven't done it yet and then calling it unfair bullshit gets you nowhere. That maneuver is ridiculous.
You understand that the feature the OP requests was in each Blizzard games since 1993? SC2 that came out in 2010 didn't have the option to create multiple accounts or at least different ladder profiles for the different races.
I mean heck, why even have win/loose stats then, why even have ladders? Why not remove everything that games 20 years older had and call it ubernet 9999.
|
On April 16 2012 10:10 resfirestar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 09:57 hoby2000 wrote:
OPs like this are merely a result of a misunderstanding of the point of ladder. The point of ladder is not to have an official ranking system we can all go by to say who's the best, but merely a way of representing one's own rank and relative skill level to the rest of the players involved in the same system. The difference between these two ideas is that on one hand you have the feeling that your rank means something in the SC2 community, and on the other you have the relative value of your skill when compared on a mass scale - meaning that the point of the ladder is to compare one's former self to one's current self to gain an understanding if you're moving in the right direction or not when it comes to making certain choices in the game. That wasn't the point of the OP. The point was that there's no decent way for a mid or high level player to try out a new race without getting absolutely stomped, learning nothing and probably getting frustrated with the new race.
And how so? If you're trying a new race out, you should get demolished. Becoming frustrated with gameplay because you lack the skills or knowledge neccesary isn't a ladder issue - it's a personal issue. If you care THAT much about ladder points in the first place, you should probably stop playing Starcraft. It's just ladder points, and in the end (for the most part), it means nothing, and again, is only a system that allows you to compare you to your former self. Using it for any other method (such as choosing who the best player is) doesn't make any sense because it's not built to find the best players. It's build to help you understand where you're at in the ladder of skill so you can improve.
|
As someone who has tanked his rating more than once for various reasons, I can confirm that it does not take very many games to drop an account with 1000+ games to whatever level you want it to go down to. Also if you find yourself dropping down to silver with an off race and want to get back up to platinum you will find yourself matching against platinum players again after about 15-20 straight wins, which should be easy if your main race is at the platinum level. A minor inconvenience, which could be remedied, but it shouldn't be a big deal.
|
Why would Blizz allowed multiple MMRs? Now you have to buy new game = more MONEY!
|
I see no point in implementing 3 separate ladders. If you lose 20 games to get down to your off-race ranking so be it, it's not like you fed one person with 20 games, it's 20 people with 1 game, that won't really boost up their ranks. People care too much about their rank, really.
Instead of 3 ladders all we need is a reset button. Easy scripting. If you want to experiment, just swallow your pride and know it'll cost something if you want to do it on ladder.
EDIT - I mean, c'mon, are you off-racing to get better ranks or because you want to learn stuff. If it's the second option, you really shouldn't care about rank drop, as that's honestly quite normal when you do something new.
|
On April 16 2012 16:36 freestalker wrote:
I see no point in implementing 3 separate ladders. If you lose 20 games to get down to your off-race ranking so be it, it's not like you fed one person with 20 games, it's 20 people with 1 game, that won't really boost up their ranks. People care too much about their rank, really.
Instead of 3 ladders all we need is a reset button. Easy scripting. If you want to experiment, just swallow your pride and know it'll cost something if you want to do it on ladder. A reset button would allow for easy smurfing: Reset your MMR, place bronze in placement and lose some more game, then crush the bronze players for your pleasure.
|
funny how they don't want anyone to have more than 1 ID because they don't want people creating new characters and just bash through lower levels, but they're fine with someone going from high masters way down with his offrace and then roflstomping his way up.
everyone should have 3 ladder characters, when you choose your race and play a game, your points should go to the specific ladder character.
Or simply everyone should be able to make 2 accounts. that would be fine too
|
On April 16 2012 15:52 TheMatrix wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 10:23 Liquid`NonY wrote:
How is a natural solution unrealistic? Either it's not natural or it's not a solution. Your writing is very unclear there.
I don't understand why you make a point about buying three copies of the game. Just because owning multiple copies of a game yields some new benefit does not mean that that benefit is something that ought to be enjoyed by people owning one copy of that game. This seems incredibly obvious to me for multiplayer games and yet you point out that it's a multiplayer benefit as if that makes it more absurd. I think the more absurd thing would be an advantage to owning multiple copies of a game for offline or single player modes.
In World of Warcraft, owning one copy of the game allows you to make multiple characters but not play them simultaneously. There are good reasons for this that I believe most MMO players respect enough that they do not protest the extra costs. They accept that people owning multiple copies of the game can experience and do things that people owning one copy cannot. Are those activities and experiences part of the game?
The thing that is logically indefensible here is a definition of what it means to "get everything out of [the game]". Noting that some benefit is possible with multiple copies of the game and impossible without multiple copies of the game does not give much insight.
You bought SC2 with the expectation that Blizzard was going to continue to add new features and content to the game via free patches. You think this feature qualifies as something that Blizzard should patch in. Make an argument to convince them to patch it in. Making a hypothetical argument as to why they haven't done it yet and then calling it unfair bullshit gets you nowhere. That maneuver is ridiculous. You understand that the feature the OP requests was in each Blizzard games since 1993? SC2 that came out in 2010 didn't have the option to create multiple accounts or at least different ladder profiles for the different races. I mean heck, why even have win/loose stats then, why even have ladders? Why not remove everything that games 20 years older had and call it ubernet 9999.
It's a different game, with a different model. If you want to play a different race, nothing in the system prevents you from playing it. It lets you play the entire game already. You just want to make it easier. Nothing's wrong with that.
These things are in the game because Blizzard wants you to have them, not because you are entitled to it as it's been in previous games.
Similarly, there is no obligation for whoever designed Battle.net 2.0 to improve upon the existing Battle.net 1.0. The develop will implement whatever he or she is told, or whatever he or she feels like. It's certainly much better for the community if the system built upon its previous success, but there is no obligation to do so whatsoever, and you are certainly not entitled to this for nothing.
|
On April 16 2012 17:13 Blisse wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 15:52 TheMatrix wrote:On April 16 2012 10:23 Liquid`NonY wrote:
How is a natural solution unrealistic? Either it's not natural or it's not a solution. Your writing is very unclear there.
I don't understand why you make a point about buying three copies of the game. Just because owning multiple copies of a game yields some new benefit does not mean that that benefit is something that ought to be enjoyed by people owning one copy of that game. This seems incredibly obvious to me for multiplayer games and yet you point out that it's a multiplayer benefit as if that makes it more absurd. I think the more absurd thing would be an advantage to owning multiple copies of a game for offline or single player modes.
In World of Warcraft, owning one copy of the game allows you to make multiple characters but not play them simultaneously. There are good reasons for this that I believe most MMO players respect enough that they do not protest the extra costs. They accept that people owning multiple copies of the game can experience and do things that people owning one copy cannot. Are those activities and experiences part of the game?
The thing that is logically indefensible here is a definition of what it means to "get everything out of [the game]". Noting that some benefit is possible with multiple copies of the game and impossible without multiple copies of the game does not give much insight.
You bought SC2 with the expectation that Blizzard was going to continue to add new features and content to the game via free patches. You think this feature qualifies as something that Blizzard should patch in. Make an argument to convince them to patch it in. Making a hypothetical argument as to why they haven't done it yet and then calling it unfair bullshit gets you nowhere. That maneuver is ridiculous. You understand that the feature the OP requests was in each Blizzard games since 1993? SC2 that came out in 2010 didn't have the option to create multiple accounts or at least different ladder profiles for the different races. I mean heck, why even have win/loose stats then, why even have ladders? Why not remove everything that games 20 years older had and call it ubernet 9999. It's a different game, with a different model. If you want to play a different race, nothing in the system prevents you from playing it. It lets you play the entire game already. You just want to make it easier. Nothing's wrong with that. These things are in the game because Blizzard wants you to have them, not because you are entitled to it as it's been in previous games. Similarly, there is no obligation for whoever designed Battle.net 2.0 to improve upon the existing Battle.net 1.0. The develop will implement whatever he or she is told, or whatever he or she feels like. It's certainly much better for the community if the system built upon its previous success, but there is no obligation to do so whatsoever, and you are certainly not entitled to this for nothing.
No, because if I knew bnet would be so crap and they didn't advertise it falsely as the next best thing since the coming of Christ, no one would have bought the game.
They need to include the features, because these were features from 20 years old games like warcraft 2. I don't know if you've seen Dota 2 or LOL or HON or Shogun 2, etc... with all the amazing multiplayer features and options.
|
On April 16 2012 19:12 TheMatrix wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 17:13 Blisse wrote:On April 16 2012 15:52 TheMatrix wrote:On April 16 2012 10:23 Liquid`NonY wrote:
How is a natural solution unrealistic? Either it's not natural or it's not a solution. Your writing is very unclear there.
I don't understand why you make a point about buying three copies of the game. Just because owning multiple copies of a game yields some new benefit does not mean that that benefit is something that ought to be enjoyed by people owning one copy of that game. This seems incredibly obvious to me for multiplayer games and yet you point out that it's a multiplayer benefit as if that makes it more absurd. I think the more absurd thing would be an advantage to owning multiple copies of a game for offline or single player modes.
In World of Warcraft, owning one copy of the game allows you to make multiple characters but not play them simultaneously. There are good reasons for this that I believe most MMO players respect enough that they do not protest the extra costs. They accept that people owning multiple copies of the game can experience and do things that people owning one copy cannot. Are those activities and experiences part of the game?
The thing that is logically indefensible here is a definition of what it means to "get everything out of [the game]". Noting that some benefit is possible with multiple copies of the game and impossible without multiple copies of the game does not give much insight.
You bought SC2 with the expectation that Blizzard was going to continue to add new features and content to the game via free patches. You think this feature qualifies as something that Blizzard should patch in. Make an argument to convince them to patch it in. Making a hypothetical argument as to why they haven't done it yet and then calling it unfair bullshit gets you nowhere. That maneuver is ridiculous. You understand that the feature the OP requests was in each Blizzard games since 1993? SC2 that came out in 2010 didn't have the option to create multiple accounts or at least different ladder profiles for the different races. I mean heck, why even have win/loose stats then, why even have ladders? Why not remove everything that games 20 years older had and call it ubernet 9999. It's a different game, with a different model. If you want to play a different race, nothing in the system prevents you from playing it. It lets you play the entire game already. You just want to make it easier. Nothing's wrong with that. These things are in the game because Blizzard wants you to have them, not because you are entitled to it as it's been in previous games. Similarly, there is no obligation for whoever designed Battle.net 2.0 to improve upon the existing Battle.net 1.0. The develop will implement whatever he or she is told, or whatever he or she feels like. It's certainly much better for the community if the system built upon its previous success, but there is no obligation to do so whatsoever, and you are certainly not entitled to this for nothing. No, because if I knew bnet would be so crap and they didn't advertise it falsely as the next best thing since the coming of Christ, no one would have bought the game. They need to include the features, because these were features from 20 years old games like warcraft 2. I don't know if you've seen Dota 2 or LOL or HON or Shogun 2, etc... with all the amazing multiplayer features and options.
If you knew bnet would be so crap... no one would have ?
I didn't hear of any of these advertisements of Battle.net 2.0. And they have no obligation either way. You seem to be confusing what it means to be a good competitor with what the business owes its customers. It owes absolutely nothing to you. You are playing this game because you enjoy it. Why does it matter to Blizzard what other games have? They don't have to be a good competitor to the other games, and offer similar multi-player features. However, it would be a good business practice to do so.
It still doesn't owe you anything. You expected improvements. They never promised anything as far as I can tell. So you had no reason to expect these other than the fact it happened before. That's a bad assumption. Again, it doesn't matter what other games have. This is not that game. I expected it and want it. But I cannot say Blizzard owes it to me to update Battle.net.
The OP's argument is that there's a flaw in the game that can only be circumvented at the moment by buying multiple games. He suggests that Blizzad implement something so that you can experience the benefits of having multiple accounts in a single account. Saying "it's a multiplayer game and you shouldn't need to buy multiple copies to get the most out of it" is non-sense, and has no correlation at all. \
EDIT: You can make the argument that Blizzard needs to implement these features to stay competitive with League of Legends or any other multi-player game. But do not suggest that Blizzard owes its players this, please. Provide reasons (there are a lot, and many already known to the majority (rhetorical)) why implementing these would be helpful. Do not yell at Blizzard for not giving you things they never were going to.
|
On April 16 2012 19:30 Blisse wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 19:12 TheMatrix wrote:On April 16 2012 17:13 Blisse wrote:On April 16 2012 15:52 TheMatrix wrote:On April 16 2012 10:23 Liquid`NonY wrote:
How is a natural solution unrealistic? Either it's not natural or it's not a solution. Your writing is very unclear there.
I don't understand why you make a point about buying three copies of the game. Just because owning multiple copies of a game yields some new benefit does not mean that that benefit is something that ought to be enjoyed by people owning one copy of that game. This seems incredibly obvious to me for multiplayer games and yet you point out that it's a multiplayer benefit as if that makes it more absurd. I think the more absurd thing would be an advantage to owning multiple copies of a game for offline or single player modes.
In World of Warcraft, owning one copy of the game allows you to make multiple characters but not play them simultaneously. There are good reasons for this that I believe most MMO players respect enough that they do not protest the extra costs. They accept that people owning multiple copies of the game can experience and do things that people owning one copy cannot. Are those activities and experiences part of the game?
The thing that is logically indefensible here is a definition of what it means to "get everything out of [the game]". Noting that some benefit is possible with multiple copies of the game and impossible without multiple copies of the game does not give much insight.
You bought SC2 with the expectation that Blizzard was going to continue to add new features and content to the game via free patches. You think this feature qualifies as something that Blizzard should patch in. Make an argument to convince them to patch it in. Making a hypothetical argument as to why they haven't done it yet and then calling it unfair bullshit gets you nowhere. That maneuver is ridiculous. You understand that the feature the OP requests was in each Blizzard games since 1993? SC2 that came out in 2010 didn't have the option to create multiple accounts or at least different ladder profiles for the different races. I mean heck, why even have win/loose stats then, why even have ladders? Why not remove everything that games 20 years older had and call it ubernet 9999. It's a different game, with a different model. If you want to play a different race, nothing in the system prevents you from playing it. It lets you play the entire game already. You just want to make it easier. Nothing's wrong with that. These things are in the game because Blizzard wants you to have them, not because you are entitled to it as it's been in previous games. Similarly, there is no obligation for whoever designed Battle.net 2.0 to improve upon the existing Battle.net 1.0. The develop will implement whatever he or she is told, or whatever he or she feels like. It's certainly much better for the community if the system built upon its previous success, but there is no obligation to do so whatsoever, and you are certainly not entitled to this for nothing. No, because if I knew bnet would be so crap and they didn't advertise it falsely as the next best thing since the coming of Christ, no one would have bought the game. They need to include the features, because these were features from 20 years old games like warcraft 2. I don't know if you've seen Dota 2 or LOL or HON or Shogun 2, etc... with all the amazing multiplayer features and options. If you knew bnet would be so crap... no one would have ? I didn't hear of any of these advertisements of Battle.net 2.0. And they have no obligation either way. You seem to be confusing what it means to be a good competitor with what the business owes its customers. It owes absolutely nothing to you. You are playing this game because you enjoy it. Why does it matter to Blizzard what other games have? They don't have to be a good competitor to the other games, and offer similar multi-player features. However, it would be a good business practice to do so. It still doesn't owe you anything. You expected improvements. They never promised anything as far as I can tell. So you had no reason to expect these other than the fact it happened before. That's a bad assumption. Again, it doesn't matter what other games have. This is not that game. I expected it and want it. But I cannot say Blizzard owes it to me to update Battle.net. The OP's argument is that there's a flaw in the game that can only be circumvented at the moment by buying multiple games. He suggests that Blizzad implement something so that you can experience the benefits of having multiple accounts in a single account. Saying "it's a multiplayer game and you shouldn't need to buy multiple copies to get the most out of it" is non-sense, and has no correlation at all. \ EDIT: You can make the argument that Blizzard needs to implement these features to stay competitive with League of Legends or any other multi-player game. But do not suggest that Blizzard owes its players this, please. Provide reasons (there are a lot, and many already known to the majority (rhetorical)) why implementing these would be helpful. Do not yell at Blizzard for not giving you things they never were going to.
of course they owe it to the players, else would mean they falsely advertised the game. I guess you haven't watched or read not one single blizzcon video or article or interview where they promised the second coming of Chirst basically with bnet 2.
|
Why not a reset button that can be clicked, once per season?
This would require you to play new placement matches?
|
On April 16 2012 12:07 Chocobo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 11:57 Zephos wrote:On April 16 2012 11:04 Chocobo wrote:On April 16 2012 10:52 Zephos wrote:
I don't understand what the big deal is. Why not just play all three races on the same account? If you play multiple races equally your skill should be pretty much the same with all, and if you don't play them equally then you won't be playing offrace frequently enough to offset your rank by much. I ladder as terran from time to time and so far it hasn't even made a dent in my ranking. And even if it had, what would I care? Ladder points don't matter, and even if they did, I could easily get them back just by playing onrace again.
tl;dr: Just ladder offrace anyway. It won't cost you anything. Seems like you do understand exactly what the big deal is, but you choose to assign a "shrug, who cares" attitude to it. Well... I think many people care a lot more than you do. I'm mid-masters with zerg, I've spent many hours improving my game to achieve this skill level. If I want to start playing terran or protoss on ladder (where I'd be plat or low diamond at best), here is what I have to do: 1) waste hours starting and leaving games to tank my MMR until I get demoted to plat 2) be unable to play competitive games with my main race during the time I'm playing T or P 3) when I eventually want to play my main race again, I have to give up playing T or P entirely, and then waste hours farming wins against inferior opponents until I get repromoted to masters I'm sorry, but it's a little bit of a big deal that I have to waste many hours of my life to manipulate a broken system just because I want to try a different race. It would be extremely simple and easy to allow me to switch back and forth between Z and T with no time wasted and no extra effort required. Instead the current system requires choosing only one race at a time, and wasting many hours to make the change. This is supposed to be a game. Why do I have to work for hours to be allowed to play it? You wouldn't have to go to the trouble of all of this. First of all, why tank your MMR? Just play offrace with your current MMR and you will be able to face opponents of about the right skill. It's true, they will be a little better than you. But your mechanics from playing zerg should translate well enough that you still have a decent shot at beating your opponent. If not, you probably don't deserve the rank you have since you would've had to play abusively to get there without sufficient mechanics. Sorry, that just isn't how it works. I am not good with protoss. I vaguely understand how to 4 gate, but don't know any builds beyond that. It is absolutely pointless for me to play against zergs who can defend 4gates with ease and will hit 200 supply in 12 minutes if I leave them alone. I don't really play terran at all. The last time I tried, I used a safe 2 rax into factory with bunker build, then floated out an expo. By the time I got my second base mining, I was at 27 workers to the zerg's 52 and he was taking a third. By the time I put together an army to go pressure him, his army was twice my size. There is nothing to be learned from one-sided games like these. I'm not getting to practice my drops or unit control or macro if the game is over by the 10 minute mark. I might as well be a bronze player getting baneling busted by July, or learning basketball by playing 1 on 1 against Kobe Bryant. Getting my face smashed into the pavement teaches me nothing. Learning is done by playing against equal skill level opponents. Also, you say that you would need to "waste hours farming" to get back to your previous rank. In making this statement, you have underestimated just how good blizzard's matchmaking system is. Allow me an anecdote to explain. Show nested quote +at the start I was top 8 masters, and by the end I was consistently playing diamonds. I was teetering on the edge of demotion (Which I'm actually grateful for, because it afforded me a game with Crota). Well, I stopped playing starcraft until I was ready to play the game for the right reasons. Do you know how long it took me to get back to where I was?
An hour. An hour and a half at most. So it took you 90 minutes go from low masters to mid masters. Is this supposed to be an argument against me? Clearly it would take significantly longer than this to go from platinum to mid masters, 2-3 hours at the very least. That's a significant amount of timewasting and extra effort that serves no purpose other than to make me more likely to quit playing Starcraft 2 in the long run. How anyone can call this a good thing is beyond me.
I guess this is just differing experience on our parts. Basically, my argument boils down to that offracing doesn't affect your performance by that much (And by that much, I mean high master can perform at low master level.) In my experience, this has proven to be true.
I also think it would prove true for most people. After all, I'm 2-3 as terran in my most recent offracing experience (which is pretty representative of most of my runs), and I have no indication that my offrace is better than the average offrace. You say that it would take 2-3 hours at least to go from platinum to mid master, and yet I would be willing to wager that for the grand majority of people, their offrace is not two full leagues below their on-race level. That just seems absurd to me.
|
On April 16 2012 19:30 Blisse wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 19:12 TheMatrix wrote:On April 16 2012 17:13 Blisse wrote:On April 16 2012 15:52 TheMatrix wrote:On April 16 2012 10:23 Liquid`NonY wrote:
How is a natural solution unrealistic? Either it's not natural or it's not a solution. Your writing is very unclear there.
I don't understand why you make a point about buying three copies of the game. Just because owning multiple copies of a game yields some new benefit does not mean that that benefit is something that ought to be enjoyed by people owning one copy of that game. This seems incredibly obvious to me for multiplayer games and yet you point out that it's a multiplayer benefit as if that makes it more absurd. I think the more absurd thing would be an advantage to owning multiple copies of a game for offline or single player modes.
In World of Warcraft, owning one copy of the game allows you to make multiple characters but not play them simultaneously. There are good reasons for this that I believe most MMO players respect enough that they do not protest the extra costs. They accept that people owning multiple copies of the game can experience and do things that people owning one copy cannot. Are those activities and experiences part of the game?
The thing that is logically indefensible here is a definition of what it means to "get everything out of [the game]". Noting that some benefit is possible with multiple copies of the game and impossible without multiple copies of the game does not give much insight.
You bought SC2 with the expectation that Blizzard was going to continue to add new features and content to the game via free patches. You think this feature qualifies as something that Blizzard should patch in. Make an argument to convince them to patch it in. Making a hypothetical argument as to why they haven't done it yet and then calling it unfair bullshit gets you nowhere. That maneuver is ridiculous. You understand that the feature the OP requests was in each Blizzard games since 1993? SC2 that came out in 2010 didn't have the option to create multiple accounts or at least different ladder profiles for the different races. I mean heck, why even have win/loose stats then, why even have ladders? Why not remove everything that games 20 years older had and call it ubernet 9999. It's a different game, with a different model. If you want to play a different race, nothing in the system prevents you from playing it. It lets you play the entire game already. You just want to make it easier. Nothing's wrong with that. These things are in the game because Blizzard wants you to have them, not because you are entitled to it as it's been in previous games. Similarly, there is no obligation for whoever designed Battle.net 2.0 to improve upon the existing Battle.net 1.0. The develop will implement whatever he or she is told, or whatever he or she feels like. It's certainly much better for the community if the system built upon its previous success, but there is no obligation to do so whatsoever, and you are certainly not entitled to this for nothing. No, because if I knew bnet would be so crap and they didn't advertise it falsely as the next best thing since the coming of Christ, no one would have bought the game. They need to include the features, because these were features from 20 years old games like warcraft 2. I don't know if you've seen Dota 2 or LOL or HON or Shogun 2, etc... with all the amazing multiplayer features and options. If you knew bnet would be so crap... no one would have ? I didn't hear of any of these advertisements of Battle.net 2.0. And they have no obligation either way. You seem to be confusing what it means to be a good competitor with what the business owes its customers. It owes absolutely nothing to you. You are playing this game because you enjoy it. Why does it matter to Blizzard what other games have? They don't have to be a good competitor to the other games, and offer similar multi-player features. However, it would be a good business practice to do so. It still doesn't owe you anything. You expected improvements. They never promised anything as far as I can tell. So you had no reason to expect these other than the fact it happened before. That's a bad assumption. Again, it doesn't matter what other games have. This is not that game. I expected it and want it. But I cannot say Blizzard owes it to me to update Battle.net. The OP's argument is that there's a flaw in the game that can only be circumvented at the moment by buying multiple games. He suggests that Blizzad implement something so that you can experience the benefits of having multiple accounts in a single account. Saying "it's a multiplayer game and you shouldn't need to buy multiple copies to get the most out of it" is non-sense, and has no correlation at all. \ EDIT: You can make the argument that Blizzard needs to implement these features to stay competitive with League of Legends or any other multi-player game. But do not suggest that Blizzard owes its players this, please. Provide reasons (there are a lot, and many already known to the majority (rhetorical)) why implementing these would be helpful. Do not yell at Blizzard for not giving you things they never were going to.
You are the customer. If you never complain even though you are being treated like shit companies will just keep treating you like shit because they know you wouldn't complain after buying their next product. And you will buy it, Blizzard wouldn't even have to fix bnet for people to buy HotS. If no one complained we'd probably get the same fucking UI for another 50 bucks, and who are we to complain then? Entitled consumers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
