EPTSC2 and the ghost-town effect - Page 12
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Sadist
United States7172 Posts
| ||
|
johnny123
521 Posts
Yes bnet .001 could do with some improvements, such as better team game matchmaking/removal of popularity for custom games/automated tournaments/Clans that you can actually moderate and a 1v1 unranked mode that uses MMR and some cross region support. As well as a live feed in the client for big tournament streams just like League of Legends has it. If blizzard is worried about lost sales from cross region, just make sure 1 cd key can only be in use no matter what region you are in. | ||
|
CScythe
Canada810 Posts
| ||
|
flanksteak
Canada246 Posts
 edit: I will add though, they really should add clan support (not for average players like me, but for teams) and shared replay viewing. Oooh and tournaments. Would do so so much for the game. | ||
|
Capulet
Canada686 Posts
2- UMS and casual games are difficult to find. Unless I'm mistaken, B.Net 2.0 shows all the top UMS maps, and it is very rare to see new maps make it to the rotation of the top maps. After a while, you will get tired of seeing the same maps over and over again. UMS games was a great place to relax after a hard day of 3v3 BGH (see later in paragraph). They need to revert back to the old system where only games with a host are shown. Casual games (although this goes hand in hand with my next point) are also difficult to find. Sometimes I just want to "3v3@BGH PROS ONLY" but I don't have a team to stack. 3- Lack of channel communities. Back in the days of B.Net 1.0 on useast, you can join clan x17, motel, whoa, etc etc etc. The only channel that I know in SC2 is teamliquid and it is always full. I have some channels (thanks to CSL) where I generally hang out and see familiar faces, but fresh blood is very rare. 4- Although this is indirect, the presence of different leagues somewhat discourages player interaction. Back the days of B.Net 1.0 (and especially in clan x17) anyone can shit talk anyone in the channel and then they would duke it out in a 1v1 LT with obs (more like witnesses), where the loser receives an endless barrage of "ROFL EZ NEWB GTFO". And yet the loser would come back the next day and the cycle begins again. Yes, this is entertainment at its finest and I would sit in the chat just to read it. With the presence of leagues, a bronze player will never shit talk a gold player because by default they already lost. Anyways, I guess this is more of a rant than anything. Hopefully there were some good points made and I apologize for the BW references. | ||
|
SoKHo
Korea (South)1081 Posts
| ||
|
SoFool
Malaysia96 Posts
| ||
|
SeraKuDA
Canada343 Posts
Battle.net 2.0 is too developed, isolated, and pretentious. | ||
|
Eluadyl
Turkey364 Posts
Social interaction over the internet is well established and there's no excuse for not implementing any of it that makes sense other than "we don't care" and "it's not in our best interest financially for #include <reasons.h>". | ||
|
cactusjack914
United States183 Posts
1v1 unranked mode that uses MMR and some cross region support 1v1 unranked that uses MMR? That doesn't make sense. using the MMR for that would just mean that you are ranked secretly. | ||
|
Eluadyl
Turkey364 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On March 06 2012 11:14 cactusjack914 wrote: 1v1 unranked mode that uses MMR and some cross region support 1v1 unranked that uses MMR? That doesn't make sense. using the MMR for that would just mean that you are ranked secretly. And that's the point. Being ranked "secretly" to reduce stress. Being off the record works wonders on a person's mind. | ||
|
Onlinejaguar
Australia2823 Posts
| ||
|
johnny123
521 Posts
On March 06 2012 11:14 cactusjack914 wrote: 1v1 unranked that uses MMR? That doesn't make sense. using the MMR for that would just mean that you are ranked secretly. if you don't use MMR then people will treat it as a cesspit for wonky strategy's all the time and they wont care if they win or loose, which makes the mode pretty pointless. Now with MMR in the unranked mode the people that use it for ACTUALLY practicing/ learning a new race will get evenly matched opponents. The guys that don't take it seriously will be ranked with like minded people who want to fuck around. | ||
|
Xapti
Canada2473 Posts
Overall, the problem is just battle.net 2.0 in general, which not only has poor social support, but has terribly annoying "features", and a lack of features such as: • Unable to view/share replays with others — WTF mate? • Stupid auto-start timer (doesn't give much time to change to the proper race, for instance) • Hosts cannot kick idiotic griever players from their games — they have to round up private people to play with or else deal with the grievers/trolls in public games • Slow, and laggy interface for the entire battle.net system (this is with a good connection and fast computer) • Terrible game listing system - People cannot have titles for their games, such as for certain skill levels only, or for certain novelty rules, or for practicing a certain matcup - Map listing system doesn't show games with players waiting to play a game. There could be 9 people waiting to play a game but noone will ever join because it's not high on the popularity list - General lack of, or poorly implemented sorting/rating/categorization of maps currently. Sure there's popularity, but not only does it only use 1 arbitrary method of popularity (hours played in the last X time?), but more importantly, it is the ONLY method of listing or finding a game (aside from keyword), which is terrible. I'd say the lack of being able to play custom games (be it melee, or special) REALLY hurts gameplay numbers, because the majority of players aren't too interested in ladder/melee (at least that's how it was in Brood War), and even those who do ladder/melee lots, might sometimes want to cool off with a more relaxing game (problem is currently the games are kinda sucky due to the bad listing system). | ||
|
onedayclose
United States1145 Posts
| ||
|
ETisME
12276 Posts
it's so stupid... | ||
|
sour_eraser
Canada932 Posts
On March 06 2012 11:08 SeraKuDA wrote: Battle.net 1.0 was like the wild west of online gaming. Battle.net 2.0 is too developed, isolated, and pretentious. Bnet 2.0 is too developed? Explain your theory with proper evidence. | ||
|
TERRANLOL
United States626 Posts
| ||
|
1hpBuiltForLove
Canada89 Posts
My point in the end, is that you must play the game in order to build a social network, and this will allow you that nostalgia and familiarity you had so effortlessly worked for in prior blizzard rts games, and find so irritably, and uncomfortably pained with, in attempting to build anew in SC2. SC2 is a Ghost Town?!? TAKE a Look In The Mirror People! | ||
|
windsupernova
Mexico5280 Posts
Errr, better clarify that, in both W3 and BW when you wanted to play a custom game only popular maps were hosted consistently just like in Sc2... And I talk to my Bnet friends all the time. Many of the chat channels are filled with idle people laddering. I just talk to the friends I have made in our private chat. But oh well I never was too much into chatcraft. | ||
| ||
