|
On July 27 2012 10:40 CaptainCharisma wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 09:31 CaptainCharisma wrote:On July 27 2012 09:28 trbot wrote:
Red-green colourblind people like me are already pissed enough about the use of red and green to differentiate good and bad. I can't see the friggin' building placement grid properly... I can't see the friggin' tiny red nuke dots since I can't differentiate between the green ground and the red dot... Friend and foe colour schemes make all units look the same to me, which makes team games with a large number of players frustrating.
How much more pissed am I going to be when I can't use any mods to change any of this? How pissed do you think I should be? How about just accepting that you're going to have problems with a game that demands basic skills that you don't have? User was warned for this post What about someone who is mentally impaired? Maybe they cannot react very fast to a drop in their base. Should we allow a mod that moves their workers away from their mineral line at a normal reaction time? Plenty of people have specific, genetic reasons why they are not as good at this game as others. It is a competitive sport. Sport is not an arena where it is generally accepted that the impaired can compete with the non-impaired. Heck, we have separate men's and women's divisions in other sports, why? We have disabled Olympics. Why?
It comes down to a question of reason. This is related to your robotic arm and leg analogy (again). It's not clear how to fix the discrepancy between the mentally impaired and those of us with regular function. However, it is perfectly clear how we should level the playing field for the 10% of the male population that deals with red-green colourblindness (and easy to implement). You can't argue (without looking like an idiot) that changing a colour gives you the same kind of advantage as automatic worker micro. Microing workers is a skill that you acquire and use to your advantage. Giving someone automatic worker micro diminishes the value of your acquired skill. Seeing the colour red is not a skill that you acquire and use to your advantage.
EDIT: as for the separate sport divisions argument, what would you advocate? That we have a colourblind division on Battle.net, and tournaments for the colourblind? Don't you think it might be a little bit easier (read: cost effective) to just allow red-green colourblind users to change red to yellow?
|
On July 27 2012 10:41 Teliko wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 10:31 Forikorder wrote:
Blizzard has made it perfectly clear they do not want people to be modding there files in any way i remember a reddit thread a long time ago talking about how Blizzard warned MC for changing the background
i really dont get the point of this thread, your trying to force blizzard to let you do whatever you want with there game despite them not wanting you to do it, what gives you the right to do this? its like making a petition asking blzizard to let you build a rax before supply depot or letting you smurf as much as you want
your lucky they decided to stop it like this instead of banning people to get the point across I'd very much like to see that thread. With the amount of people using mods, a statement like that would have brought a lot of discussion. I find it interesting how it was never brought to my attention. It's nothing like your examples, actually. Rax before depo is a balancing issue. Using smurf accounts brings a negative experience to the less skilled players facing the smurf. I need not state the benefits of Stronger Team Colours. Other mods may not bring benefit to people quite like STC, but for some, actually quite a lot, it makes the game more enjoyable.
it was an insanely long time ago (like around the GSL open seasons i think) so i dont think its possible to find it ill look but im pretty terrible at this stuff
Blizzard has made it clear they dont want people modding there files, thats why every thread advertising a mod has a warning saying that using this mod does put you in danger of being banned by Blizzard even though theres been no reports of people being banned for using this mod and using that as an excuse to use it
Blizzard jsut made it impossible to mod, guess you cant say they have no problem with it now :/
|
its against TOS. for editing files.
rather than have someone hacking ,
i like this decision
|
Courtesy of capitalism, they are elected by our choice to partake in their services. Commerce always answers to the consumer. I'm not sure why you even made this point.
"Commerce always answers to the consumer." I am a consumer. In fact, I'm in the majority, that is, people who don't mod. It looks like you just defeated your own argument. Despite this, there is no constitutional foundation for a corporation. It is not legitimate in the sense that the US is. It does not have to abide by a constitution.
You admit we do reasonable things that we believe are fair. Does a yellow nuke dot seem like a fully functional robotic arm or leg? It seems to me like a reasonable thing that most people will believe is fair (if you pysicially can't see the red one). It almost seems like the benefit is greater than the cost...
First of all, we don't do -everything- we think is reasonable or fair because sometimes the costs are too high, and for little reward. Do you get that?
And yeah, considering you're colour-blind, I think you may be a little biased as to how you quantify the benefit. Blizzard is the important figure here, not you nor I. There are plenty of other games out there for you, but no, you choose to hold up progress in our game with a petition. Your notion of fairness is clearly skewed in your favour.
|
On July 27 2012 10:44 Forikorder wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 10:41 Teliko wrote:On July 27 2012 10:31 Forikorder wrote:
Blizzard has made it perfectly clear they do not want people to be modding there files in any way i remember a reddit thread a long time ago talking about how Blizzard warned MC for changing the background
i really dont get the point of this thread, your trying to force blizzard to let you do whatever you want with there game despite them not wanting you to do it, what gives you the right to do this? its like making a petition asking blzizard to let you build a rax before supply depot or letting you smurf as much as you want
your lucky they decided to stop it like this instead of banning people to get the point across I'd very much like to see that thread. With the amount of people using mods, a statement like that would have brought a lot of discussion. I find it interesting how it was never brought to my attention. It's nothing like your examples, actually. Rax before depo is a balancing issue. Using smurf accounts brings a negative experience to the less skilled players facing the smurf. I need not state the benefits of Stronger Team Colours. Other mods may not bring benefit to people quite like STC, but for some, actually quite a lot, it makes the game more enjoyable. it was an insanely long time ago (like around the GSL open seasons i think) so i dont think its possible to find it ill look but im pretty terrible at this stuff Blizzard has made it clear they dont want people modding there files, thats why every thread advertising a mod has a warning saying that using this mod does put you in danger of being banned by Blizzard even though theres been no reports of people being banned for using this mod and using that as an excuse to use it Blizzard jsut made it impossible to mod, guess you cant say they have no problem with it now :/
Well they never directly said this change had the primary intention of stopping modding, I'm not up to date with the recent or upcoming changes, but someone was stating some change with the patch regarding streaming updates while playing. There's a lot of outcomes for the reason behind this and it could be completely coincidental that it affects modding, but I want to at least try and defend it in the hopes it was merely a coincidence or there's still the possibility of changing their minds once they see just how many people are behind this. We've been sharing mods for well over a year at this stage, if they really want to stop us, they'd have taken a bigger step to prevent it by now. There's nothing wrong with defending what so many people have put so much time into.
|
On July 27 2012 10:52 CaptainCharisma wrote:Show nested quote +Courtesy of capitalism, they are elected by our choice to partake in their services. Commerce always answers to the consumer. I'm not sure why you even made this point. "Commerce always answers to the consumer." I am a consumer. In fact, I'm in the majority, that is, people who don't mod. It looks like you just defeated your own argument. Despite this, there is no constitutional foundation for a corporation. It is not legitimate in the sense that the US is. It does not have to abide by a constitution. Show nested quote +You admit we do reasonable things that we believe are fair. Does a yellow nuke dot seem like a fully functional robotic arm or leg? It seems to me like a reasonable thing that most people will believe is fair (if you pysicially can't see the red one). It almost seems like the benefit is greater than the cost...
First of all, we don't do -everything- we think is reasonable or fair because sometimes the costs are too high, and for little reward. Do you get that? And yeah, considering you're colour-blind, I think you may be a little biased as to how you quantify the benefit. Blizzard is the important figure here, not you nor I. There are plenty of other games out there for you, but no, you choose to hold up progress in our game with a petition. Your notion of fairness is clearly skewed in your favour.
Why are you bringing the U.S. constitution into this? Your lack of basic reasoning skills is really starting to show, and it seems like you're getting desperate. I didn't defeat my argument. I defeated yours. If Blizzard will lose your business by allowing modding, then I've supported your argument.
I'm quantifying the benefit in an objective sense. It costs you nothing, and you grant a boon to 10% of the male population. If you'd like me to elaborate on why it costs you nothing, I can do that. You, however, have offered nothing to suggest there is a cost. Stop making a fool of yourself.
|
On July 27 2012 10:31 trbot wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 10:27 Dingobloo wrote:
The game is now streamable, you can begin playing it even if it hasn't finished downloading/patching like Diablo and World of Warcraft.
[...]
This is the #1 reason the file verification stuff is now in the game, because of the streaming, it needs to make sure that the core game files are all complete and uncorrupted before it starts up.
This is a nice feature. However, this doesn't need MPQ files to be verified on regular game startup. They can just be verified once by the installer (not the game) before the game is loaded for the first time. Hence, this change is totally unnecessary.
Except certain files actually change after installation, the minimum install uses the lowest quality textures then adds the higher quality ones as you download more. They have no way of differentiating between partially downloaded textures and modified ones in an efficient manner which is why skins are particularly problematic.
|
On July 27 2012 10:53 Teliko wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 10:44 Forikorder wrote:On July 27 2012 10:41 Teliko wrote:On July 27 2012 10:31 Forikorder wrote:
Blizzard has made it perfectly clear they do not want people to be modding there files in any way i remember a reddit thread a long time ago talking about how Blizzard warned MC for changing the background
i really dont get the point of this thread, your trying to force blizzard to let you do whatever you want with there game despite them not wanting you to do it, what gives you the right to do this? its like making a petition asking blzizard to let you build a rax before supply depot or letting you smurf as much as you want
your lucky they decided to stop it like this instead of banning people to get the point across I'd very much like to see that thread. With the amount of people using mods, a statement like that would have brought a lot of discussion. I find it interesting how it was never brought to my attention. It's nothing like your examples, actually. Rax before depo is a balancing issue. Using smurf accounts brings a negative experience to the less skilled players facing the smurf. I need not state the benefits of Stronger Team Colours. Other mods may not bring benefit to people quite like STC, but for some, actually quite a lot, it makes the game more enjoyable. it was an insanely long time ago (like around the GSL open seasons i think) so i dont think its possible to find it ill look but im pretty terrible at this stuff Blizzard has made it clear they dont want people modding there files, thats why every thread advertising a mod has a warning saying that using this mod does put you in danger of being banned by Blizzard even though theres been no reports of people being banned for using this mod and using that as an excuse to use it Blizzard jsut made it impossible to mod, guess you cant say they have no problem with it now :/ Well they never directly said this change had the primary intention of stopping modding, I'm not up to date with the recent or upcoming changes, but someone was stating some change with the patch regarding streaming updates while playing. There's a lot of outcomes for the reason behind this and it could be completely coincidental that it affects modding, but I want to at least try and defend it in the hopes it was merely a coincidence or there's still the possibility of changing their minds once they see just how many people are behind this. We've been sharing mods for well over a year at this stage, if they really want to stop us, they'd have taken a bigger step to prevent it by now. There's nothing wrong with defending what so many people have put so much time into.
i understand where your coming from, but Blizz has always frowned on this sort of stuff and they never did anything to make it possible so why would they let the modders give the middle finger to the art staff and change it?
besides the whole "we spent alot of time on this" pretty mcuh falls on deaf ears, you knew from the get go you were doing something blizzard didnt like and was likely that it would all become pointless eventually jsut because it took them a year to for it all to come to an end doesnt really matter its a shame but a petition wont change anything, either A) they did this purposely B) they didnt but since they dont like modding they consider it a bonus or C) they did it by accident and are already willing to change it back
but from waht ive seen in this thread, could this really have been done by accident? what does this change affect aside from people modding there files?
|
Why the hell does the partition need my full address?
|
On July 27 2012 10:57 Forikorder wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 10:53 Teliko wrote:On July 27 2012 10:44 Forikorder wrote:On July 27 2012 10:41 Teliko wrote:On July 27 2012 10:31 Forikorder wrote:
Blizzard has made it perfectly clear they do not want people to be modding there files in any way i remember a reddit thread a long time ago talking about how Blizzard warned MC for changing the background
i really dont get the point of this thread, your trying to force blizzard to let you do whatever you want with there game despite them not wanting you to do it, what gives you the right to do this? its like making a petition asking blzizard to let you build a rax before supply depot or letting you smurf as much as you want
your lucky they decided to stop it like this instead of banning people to get the point across I'd very much like to see that thread. With the amount of people using mods, a statement like that would have brought a lot of discussion. I find it interesting how it was never brought to my attention. It's nothing like your examples, actually. Rax before depo is a balancing issue. Using smurf accounts brings a negative experience to the less skilled players facing the smurf. I need not state the benefits of Stronger Team Colours. Other mods may not bring benefit to people quite like STC, but for some, actually quite a lot, it makes the game more enjoyable. it was an insanely long time ago (like around the GSL open seasons i think) so i dont think its possible to find it ill look but im pretty terrible at this stuff Blizzard has made it clear they dont want people modding there files, thats why every thread advertising a mod has a warning saying that using this mod does put you in danger of being banned by Blizzard even though theres been no reports of people being banned for using this mod and using that as an excuse to use it Blizzard jsut made it impossible to mod, guess you cant say they have no problem with it now :/ Well they never directly said this change had the primary intention of stopping modding, I'm not up to date with the recent or upcoming changes, but someone was stating some change with the patch regarding streaming updates while playing. There's a lot of outcomes for the reason behind this and it could be completely coincidental that it affects modding, but I want to at least try and defend it in the hopes it was merely a coincidence or there's still the possibility of changing their minds once they see just how many people are behind this. We've been sharing mods for well over a year at this stage, if they really want to stop us, they'd have taken a bigger step to prevent it by now. There's nothing wrong with defending what so many people have put so much time into. i understand where your coming from, but Blizz has always frowned on this sort of stuff and they never did anything to make it possible so why would they let the modders give the middle finger to the art staff and change it?
I'm fully aware the likeliness they're going to give a shit about any of this is slim to none and I can respect whatever their reason might be, but it doesn't hurt to at least try.
|
On July 27 2012 11:00 Debian wrote:
Why the hell does the partition need my full address?
Yeah, I can't do anything about that. It's kind of ridiculous, but you should be able to write any old gibberish in it, or just tick the box to keep it anonymous.
|
I rather like this decision by Blizzard (for once). pretty much all of these customizations are fairly pointless and don't acheive anything other than breaking the TOS.
plus I have seen some tournaments using the stronger colour mod, and frankly it burns my eyes just looking at it, so much so that I have to shut the stream off so my eyes don't feel like they are going to fall off. There isa reason they are doing this.
this frankly forces tournaments to use the same colour scheme, so not every tournament has a different colour scheme for the units being shown. it makes it easier on the viewer and the player wanting to study the builds being used, its rather difficult with all these neon colours everywhere.
|
On July 27 2012 10:56 trbot wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 10:52 CaptainCharisma wrote:Courtesy of capitalism, they are elected by our choice to partake in their services. Commerce always answers to the consumer. I'm not sure why you even made this point. "Commerce always answers to the consumer." I am a consumer. In fact, I'm in the majority, that is, people who don't mod. It looks like you just defeated your own argument. Despite this, there is no constitutional foundation for a corporation. It is not legitimate in the sense that the US is. It does not have to abide by a constitution. You admit we do reasonable things that we believe are fair. Does a yellow nuke dot seem like a fully functional robotic arm or leg? It seems to me like a reasonable thing that most people will believe is fair (if you pysicially can't see the red one). It almost seems like the benefit is greater than the cost...
First of all, we don't do -everything- we think is reasonable or fair because sometimes the costs are too high, and for little reward. Do you get that? And yeah, considering you're colour-blind, I think you may be a little biased as to how you quantify the benefit. Blizzard is the important figure here, not you nor I. There are plenty of other games out there for you, but no, you choose to hold up progress in our game with a petition. Your notion of fairness is clearly skewed in your favour. Why are you bringing the U.S. constitution into this? Your lack of basic reasoning skills is really starting to show, and it seems like you're getting desperate. I didn't defeat my argument. I defeated yours. If Blizzard will lose your business by allowing modding, then I've supported your argument. I'm quantifying the benefit in an objective sense. It costs you nothing, and you grant a boon to 10% of the male population. If you'd like me to elaborate on why it costs you nothing, I can do that. You, however, have offered nothing to suggest there is a cost. Stop making a fool of yourself.
It's a sign of weakness when half of your posts are telling me how wrong I am instead of showing me how wrong I am.
Your point was that Blizzard is like a government because we chose to purchase their game, right, thereby "electing" it? If this is not your argument you should have explained it better. You then simply say 'commerce answers to the consumer'. This is extremely vague, and all I can say is we are both consumers, who should be heard in favour of the other? I am in the majority of people who don't mod. Why should Blizzard then care about a small minority of people who want to mod if that mod is incompatible with new advances in their coding system for the benefit of the majority?
Why did I mention the US constitution? It was an analogy. You seem to have problems with these so don't read too much into it. When you compared Blizzard to a government, I pointed out governments (whether written or not) have constitutions which they must abide by. Blizzard has no such restriction.
And yes, please explain how it costs me nothing. Blizzard appears to have spent time and effort on a new coding system for my, the consumer's, benefit. This petition seeks to restrict that benefit. You can quibble over 'forgone benefit does not equal a cost', but any reasonable person can see there is a detriment there. Before these mods came out, you were unable to see red dots on the screen. That position changed with the mods, but may revert One could say that overall, you did not suffer any costs. I would disagree however. The same applies to the forgone benefit this petition would create.
|
nooooo, I was just about to try out the dark protoss model since I am switch to toss soon 
|
I would miss stronger team color quite a bit. I don't really know much about how hackers go about their business, but if this change stops hacking I guess I'd be fine with it. But then again, I'm sure there's a thousand other holes they can climb through.
|
There was actually an interview on reddit where Browder said he supports the STC mod.
LINK
From the reddit thread:
Has any thought been given to incorporating aspects of the Strong Team Colors mod?
:Browder loves the idea for both the professional scene and everyone else. They're looking at their options and like/support the mod, but don't know if they'll add anything.
EDIT: Youtube interview link
|
On July 27 2012 08:47 Teliko wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 08:41 SeraKuDA wrote:
Eh... Mods aren't a huge deal to lose. I think it's only a small percentage of people that use them. That percentage is still in the hundreds of thousands of people. Reducing their entertainment value for no benefit in return doesn't seem very fair.
There aren't even hundreds of thousands of people that play this game on a consistent basis.
|
On July 27 2012 11:18 Beorning wrote:
I would miss stronger team color quite a bit. I don't really know much about how hackers go about their business, but if this change stops hacking I guess I'd be fine with it. But then again, I'm sure there's a thousand other holes they can climb through.
I'm just going to repost this here in this thread since people still actually think this change stops hackers:
This is will not do anything to stop hackers. What it does do, however, is stop legitimate mods and customization. Current hackers today (i.e. map hackers) do not even edit any files. They use external programs that inject into the game after it's been launched, not before. Warden in it's current state is useless in WoW, Diablo, and Starcraft. Until they fix it, hackers will still be around. And Blizzard, for whatever reason, refuses to do so.
|
On July 27 2012 11:18 Anarith wrote:There was actually an interview on reddit where Browder said he supports the STC mod. LINKFrom the reddit thread: Has any thought been given to incorporating aspects of the Strong Team Colors mod? :Browder loves the idea for both the professional scene and everyone else. They're looking at their options and like/support the mod, but don't know if they'll add anything. EDIT: Youtube interview link
doesnt mean they actually like Mods jsut means they might take the STC mod and incorportate it as a toggle into the actual client
|
On July 27 2012 11:14 CaptainCharisma wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 10:56 trbot wrote:On July 27 2012 10:52 CaptainCharisma wrote:Courtesy of capitalism, they are elected by our choice to partake in their services. Commerce always answers to the consumer. I'm not sure why you even made this point. "Commerce always answers to the consumer." I am a consumer. In fact, I'm in the majority, that is, people who don't mod. It looks like you just defeated your own argument. Despite this, there is no constitutional foundation for a corporation. It is not legitimate in the sense that the US is. It does not have to abide by a constitution. You admit we do reasonable things that we believe are fair. Does a yellow nuke dot seem like a fully functional robotic arm or leg? It seems to me like a reasonable thing that most people will believe is fair (if you pysicially can't see the red one). It almost seems like the benefit is greater than the cost...
First of all, we don't do -everything- we think is reasonable or fair because sometimes the costs are too high, and for little reward. Do you get that? And yeah, considering you're colour-blind, I think you may be a little biased as to how you quantify the benefit. Blizzard is the important figure here, not you nor I. There are plenty of other games out there for you, but no, you choose to hold up progress in our game with a petition. Your notion of fairness is clearly skewed in your favour. Why are you bringing the U.S. constitution into this? Your lack of basic reasoning skills is really starting to show, and it seems like you're getting desperate. I didn't defeat my argument. I defeated yours. If Blizzard will lose your business by allowing modding, then I've supported your argument. I'm quantifying the benefit in an objective sense. It costs you nothing, and you grant a boon to 10% of the male population. If you'd like me to elaborate on why it costs you nothing, I can do that. You, however, have offered nothing to suggest there is a cost. Stop making a fool of yourself. It's a sign of weakness when half of your posts are telling me how wrong I am instead of showing me how wrong I am. Your point was that Blizzard is like a government because we chose to purchase their game, right, thereby "electing" it? If this is not your argument you should have explained it better. You then simply say 'commerce answers to the consumer'. This is extremely vague, and all I can say is we are both consumers, who should be heard in favour of the other? I am in the majority of people who don't mod. Why should Blizzard then care about a small minority of people who want to mod if that mod is incompatible with new advances in their coding system for the benefit of the majority? Why did I mention the US constitution? It was an analogy. You seem to have problems with these so don't read too much into it. When you compared Blizzard to a government, I pointed out governments (whether written or not) have constitutions which they must abide by. Blizzard has no such restriction. And yes, please explain how it costs me nothing. Blizzard appears to have spent time and effort on a new coding system for my, the consumer's, benefit. This petition seeks to restrict that benefit. You can quibble over 'forgone benefit does not equal a cost', but any reasonable person can see there is a detriment there. Before these mods came out, you were unable to see red dots on the screen. That position changed with the mods, but may revert One could say that overall, you did not suffer any costs. I would disagree however. The same applies to the forgone benefit this petition would create.
It's not a sign of weakness, it's a sign of frustration. For lack of a kinder way to say this, it's hard arguing with someone who poses such weak and chaotic arguments. You lack focus. Among other things, this tells me that you're young.
Why would Blizzard care about a large percentage of its customer base? Is that seriously your question? Even if you believe (for no reason whatsoever) that 90% of people don't mod, you can't even discount the 10% of colourblind players that would benefit from a mod like STC. Last time I checked, a 10% drop in a company's value can trigger a panic. I don't think you're seriously going to argue that Blizzard doesn't care about 10% of its revenue. (If you need this spelled out for you, people won't buy your future games if you piss them off enough. After the Diablo 3 debacle, I, for one, won't be buying Diablo 4, and I'll think twice about any other Blizzard games. People are already developing the notion that Activision-Blizzard doesn't care. Do you think things will go well for them if they allow that image to persist? They're backpedaling hard, trying to show the community that they care. That's why the last few patch notes have explicitly mentioned that they're listening to players.)
The fact that you say "coding system" tells me that you know nothing about programming. I, however, am finishing a masters in theoretical computer science, already having bachelors' in computer science and pure mathematics. I can tell you with 100% certainty that the inability to make this MPQ scanning change will have <1% impact on their ability to make progress with the rest of their planned improvements.
I have problems with your analogies because they're irrelevant. Blizzard is bound by its shareholders and its bottom line. It doesn't need a moral compass or a constitutional obligation. If a large fraction of its user base is annoyed by its decisions, it will fail. Even if I accept your premise that you're in the majority, I've already argued that even 10% (already accounted for by my colourblind kin) is too much to discount.
As for the issue of cost, I've already argued that progress will not be halted or even substantially stalled at the cost of fine-tuning the MPQ file check (e.g., to compute an MD5 signature on part of the file, rather than the whole file, or by computing it only during installation, as opposed to on every startup--a feat that would be prohibitively computationally expensive, by the way). If Blizzard programmers have designed things reasonably well, then the kind of tweak we're talking is something one programmer can do in an afternoon. I've also argued that the only touted benefit to this MPQ file validation is a hoax, since hackers will easily be able to continue with or without the ability to modify MPQ files. If you still disagree with these points, I find it hard to believe you're arguing from a position where you understand what you're saying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
