|
On September 30 2016 21:47 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2016 20:30 todespolka wrote:On September 30 2016 05:11 Beelzebub1 wrote:On September 30 2016 02:26 geokilla wrote:On September 30 2016 02:24 phodacbiet wrote:
Ah, after 6 years. The technology is finally here. Too little too late. I love that they are putting them in but I can't really deny this, these just all strike me as features that should have been in the game from the get go when it was in it's prime, now that SC2 is kind of like actually dying it all just seems like a moot point. At worst it looks like blizzard is finally realizing that the games popularity is rapidly dwindling and now they are scrambling to bring people back. It will start with replacing David Kim with someone more competent, plain and simple. Even the new patch is just going to create massive amounts of new balance issues that will take many patches to iron out and all we'll get is a neutered watered down version of the original thing. These comments can only come from people who have no idea how the world works. You cant work on everything at once. That should be clear to anyone! The developement of hots and lotv was the priority and you should be able to understand why. When it comes to features, you can always say these and that should be in the game from the start. There are maybe 100 more features which you could improve and/or implement. Can you implement them all at once? Hell no! How would that work? Maybe it works in your fantasy. Maybe they should hire you! You would do such a better job! I stopped visiting sc2 forums because of these whiners, complainers, haters and short minded guys. Sc2 forums are hell! I am sure i am not alone. This will happen until only negative people are left. That's a heavy load of BS. Work on everything at the same time? Blizzard is supposed, as a major gaming company, to deliver a complete product. I can excuse that the first release of STALKER was buggy as hell because it was done by a potato developper. I can't excuse it from a company that's been harvesting shitons of cash from WoW and Diablo III (which was also incomplete on release and a total rip off). LOTV was supposed to have a long beta phase where a whole lot of stuff was promised (solving the issues that were present since WOL). What did we end up with? Adepts everywhere, heavy camp ZvT, liberator abuse, and pro players right clicking units into mineral lines to kill workers all the fucking time. Granted, the next patch looks like it'll solve some amount of problems. But when blizz was to take a look on HOTS photon overcharge, is the LOTV one better in design? Absolutely fucking not, it can even be used offensively. Is the new economy better? Meh, arguably : the 12 workers start is decent, but overall the mins/gaz per base decrease punishes not expanding more than it grants advantages for having more bases than your opponent. But releasing LOTV in time for christmas was much more important than delivering a game that answered the issues blizz promised it would. Keeping a somewhat reasonnable and sensible opinion on blizz's attitude towards SC2 is difficult. There is a good amount of blind fanboys so lost in their idolatry that they can't see how much cash they're dumping into mediocre expansions. People that feel like "blizzard are doing what they can" and that they "can't do everything at once". Well maybe, just maybe, for a multi million dollars company, you can expect more than a change every 3 months. Maybe you can expect better design than shooting supply. Overall when discussing with these people, it's understandable that many end up bitter and annoyed. On the bright side, it's true that since the community summit and the test map, things are moving a little faster and blizz is showing good will recently.
I feel like you are missing the whole point.
It's not that Blizzard should not do a 'finished' product.
It's just that what you (not only you personally, but way too many people posting here) consider as a 'finished' product, has to include the work of ten time more people working for five time longer (just throwing number at random, I see you coming).
So yes, you should ask 'more', because unfortunately, the world works in a way that people not asking more are usually given less. But you cannot ask for everything. As has been stated over and over again in every thread like this one, 'just doing [this or that]' does not exist in a big company/for a big project.
|
|
|
On September 30 2016 22:17 AbouSV wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2016 21:47 JackONeill wrote:On September 30 2016 20:30 todespolka wrote:On September 30 2016 05:11 Beelzebub1 wrote:On September 30 2016 02:26 geokilla wrote:On September 30 2016 02:24 phodacbiet wrote:
Ah, after 6 years. The technology is finally here. Too little too late. I love that they are putting them in but I can't really deny this, these just all strike me as features that should have been in the game from the get go when it was in it's prime, now that SC2 is kind of like actually dying it all just seems like a moot point. At worst it looks like blizzard is finally realizing that the games popularity is rapidly dwindling and now they are scrambling to bring people back. It will start with replacing David Kim with someone more competent, plain and simple. Even the new patch is just going to create massive amounts of new balance issues that will take many patches to iron out and all we'll get is a neutered watered down version of the original thing. These comments can only come from people who have no idea how the world works. You cant work on everything at once. That should be clear to anyone! The developement of hots and lotv was the priority and you should be able to understand why. When it comes to features, you can always say these and that should be in the game from the start. There are maybe 100 more features which you could improve and/or implement. Can you implement them all at once? Hell no! How would that work? Maybe it works in your fantasy. Maybe they should hire you! You would do such a better job! I stopped visiting sc2 forums because of these whiners, complainers, haters and short minded guys. Sc2 forums are hell! I am sure i am not alone. This will happen until only negative people are left. That's a heavy load of BS. Work on everything at the same time? Blizzard is supposed, as a major gaming company, to deliver a complete product. I can excuse that the first release of STALKER was buggy as hell because it was done by a potato developper. I can't excuse it from a company that's been harvesting shitons of cash from WoW and Diablo III (which was also incomplete on release and a total rip off). LOTV was supposed to have a long beta phase where a whole lot of stuff was promised (solving the issues that were present since WOL). What did we end up with? Adepts everywhere, heavy camp ZvT, liberator abuse, and pro players right clicking units into mineral lines to kill workers all the fucking time. Granted, the next patch looks like it'll solve some amount of problems. But when blizz was to take a look on HOTS photon overcharge, is the LOTV one better in design? Absolutely fucking not, it can even be used offensively. Is the new economy better? Meh, arguably : the 12 workers start is decent, but overall the mins/gaz per base decrease punishes not expanding more than it grants advantages for having more bases than your opponent. But releasing LOTV in time for christmas was much more important than delivering a game that answered the issues blizz promised it would. Keeping a somewhat reasonnable and sensible opinion on blizz's attitude towards SC2 is difficult. There is a good amount of blind fanboys so lost in their idolatry that they can't see how much cash they're dumping into mediocre expansions. People that feel like "blizzard are doing what they can" and that they "can't do everything at once". Well maybe, just maybe, for a multi million dollars company, you can expect more than a change every 3 months. Maybe you can expect better design than shooting supply. Overall when discussing with these people, it's understandable that many end up bitter and annoyed. On the bright side, it's true that since the community summit and the test map, things are moving a little faster and blizz is showing good will recently. I feel like you are missing the whole point. It's not that Blizzard should not do a 'finished' product. It's just that what you (not only you personally, but way too many people posting here) consider as a 'finished' product, has to include the work of ten time more people working for five time longer (just throwing number at random, I see you coming). So yes, you should ask 'more', because unfortunately, the world works in a way that people not asking more are usually given less. But you cannot ask for everything. As has been stated over and over again in every thread like this one, 'just doing [this or that]' does not exist in a big company/for a big project.
My very point was that they shouldn't have released the game in november 2015 in time for christmas after a somewhat short beta AFTER promising that LOTV would have a long beta phase where the game would be experimented upon. In the end, very mild changes and very little was solved. The game's release was rushed, most certainly for commercial reasons.
No wonder that people are getting annoyed that things that should have been in the original LOTV release are coming now in a random manner. Especially since, in all honnesty, it really felt like blizzard abandonned the game in the time separating the community summit and the release. When you get a rushed release that lacks a good amount of stuff which was promised, and that blizzard then procedes to go on a hiatus where nothing was done, of course people get annoyed.
On a personal note i feel very disappointed in blizzard's latest titles. Diablo III was very light content-wise, and the inital release felt like a rip off. HOTS and LOTV felt like adding band aids after band aids on a open wound. From what i've heard the warcraft movie was terrible too.
One thing that has to be considered is that blizzard games are overpriced. This isn't necessarly a bad thing if the blizzard seal of quality garrantied the game was going to be very rich and with lots of content. However this seems to be less and less the case (overwatch is 40€ for a multiplayer only game, that would be kind of outrageous if that came from another developper)
|
On September 30 2016 21:47 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2016 20:30 todespolka wrote:On September 30 2016 05:11 Beelzebub1 wrote:On September 30 2016 02:26 geokilla wrote:On September 30 2016 02:24 phodacbiet wrote:
Ah, after 6 years. The technology is finally here. Too little too late. I love that they are putting them in but I can't really deny this, these just all strike me as features that should have been in the game from the get go when it was in it's prime, now that SC2 is kind of like actually dying it all just seems like a moot point. At worst it looks like blizzard is finally realizing that the games popularity is rapidly dwindling and now they are scrambling to bring people back. It will start with replacing David Kim with someone more competent, plain and simple. Even the new patch is just going to create massive amounts of new balance issues that will take many patches to iron out and all we'll get is a neutered watered down version of the original thing. These comments can only come from people who have no idea how the world works. You cant work on everything at once. That should be clear to anyone! The developement of hots and lotv was the priority and you should be able to understand why. When it comes to features, you can always say these and that should be in the game from the start. There are maybe 100 more features which you could improve and/or implement. Can you implement them all at once? Hell no! How would that work? Maybe it works in your fantasy. Maybe they should hire you! You would do such a better job! I stopped visiting sc2 forums because of these whiners, complainers, haters and short minded guys. Sc2 forums are hell! I am sure i am not alone. This will happen until only negative people are left. That's a heavy load of BS. Work on everything at the same time? Blizzard is supposed, as a major gaming company, to deliver a complete product.
Could've stopped reading after this sentence.
It's great that this feature is finally here as this will make the game more convenient for many, but it is in no way required for the game to be good, or in any way, shape or form the reason that SC2 is in a bad state. So why are you getting so riled up over this?
|
|
|
Is it means that unranked have separate MMR too?
|
On September 30 2016 18:28 Probe1 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2016 18:11 Jer99 wrote:On September 30 2016 17:49 Turi wrote:On September 30 2016 13:46 NMxSardines wrote:
I am annoyed that after some point any good news coming from Blizzard in relation to Starcraft 2 must always be received with a fuckton of passive aggression from fans. What's the goal of it? What does wallowing over fantastical (and often unrealistic) visions of 'what Starcraft 2 could've been' accomplish?
All it does is sour a good moment.
Who the hell wants to read aimless negativity on every single Blizzard post about Starcraft? If you buy a house that is missing a interior wall between bedroom and living room, do you also greet your contractor with cake when he comes 5 years later to put the wall in? I mean, complaining that he did nothing for five years would be souring a good moment. Just because blizzard does what it should have done from the start and promised to do over a year ago, does not mean I will praise them for it, even when I am still happy to get it. Is that really a fair comparison? Did anyone think that separate race MMR was a must have on release? I doubt it. I doubt anyone even though of having it at the time. I thought SC2 was, and is still an incredibly fun and complete game, to me this is an extra feature, like gravy on fries There were many missing things that people balked at from separate races rankings, to cross region support, to even chat channels.
there are a bazillion ways to congregate and communicate via text.
consumers had several choices in 2010 for RTS games. the only game with a lengthy multiplayer beta test that included balance patches during thte beta was SC2. therefore, competitive players flocked towards SC2.
SC2 offered plenty of things no other RTS offered in 2010 and was a more complete product than C&C4, DoW2, or SupComm2. Its no surprise the combined player bases for these games is a fraction of SC2.
Blizzard's biggest rival for RTS marketshare at the time was the C&C franchise. SC2 was better than C&C4 in every respect.
what were you doing at 11:59 on July 26th 2010? you probably know what i was doing.
Here, let me trash another game the way you are trashing SC2. Diablo3 has competitive seasons and Borderlands2 does not. Borderlands1 fans created point based scavenger hunts using excel spreadsheets and screamed for some kind of point based competitive mode. Therefore, Borderlands2 is an incomplete product. umm ya.
you can criticize any game as being incomplete 6 years later claiming it was never worth the money.
|
Wow, whiners gonna whine on this thread. This is a good move. Looking forward to trying it out.
|
On October 01 2016 00:27 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2016 18:28 Probe1 wrote:On September 30 2016 18:11 Jer99 wrote:On September 30 2016 17:49 Turi wrote:On September 30 2016 13:46 NMxSardines wrote:
I am annoyed that after some point any good news coming from Blizzard in relation to Starcraft 2 must always be received with a fuckton of passive aggression from fans. What's the goal of it? What does wallowing over fantastical (and often unrealistic) visions of 'what Starcraft 2 could've been' accomplish?
All it does is sour a good moment.
Who the hell wants to read aimless negativity on every single Blizzard post about Starcraft? If you buy a house that is missing a interior wall between bedroom and living room, do you also greet your contractor with cake when he comes 5 years later to put the wall in? I mean, complaining that he did nothing for five years would be souring a good moment. Just because blizzard does what it should have done from the start and promised to do over a year ago, does not mean I will praise them for it, even when I am still happy to get it. Is that really a fair comparison? Did anyone think that separate race MMR was a must have on release? I doubt it. I doubt anyone even though of having it at the time. I thought SC2 was, and is still an incredibly fun and complete game, to me this is an extra feature, like gravy on fries There were many missing things that people balked at from separate races rankings, to cross region support, to even chat channels. there are a bazillion ways to congregate and communicate via text. consumers had several choices in 2010 for RTS games. the only game with a lengthy multiplayer beta test that included balance patches during thte beta was SC2. therefore, competitive players flocked towards SC2. SC2 offered plenty of things no other RTS offered in 2010 and was a more complete product than C&C4, DoW2, or SupComm2. Its no surprise the combined player bases for these games is a fraction of SC2. Blizzard's biggest rival for RTS marketshare at the time was the C&C franchise. SC2 was better than C&C4 in every respect. what were you doing at 11:59 on July 26th 2010? you probably know what i was doing. Here, let me trash another game the way you are trashing SC2. Diablo3 has competitive seasons and Borderlands2 does not. Borderlands1 fans created point based scavenger hunts using excel spreadsheets and screamed for some kind of point based competitive mode. Therefore, Borderlands2 is an incomplete product. umm ya. you can criticize any game as being incomplete 6 years later claiming it was never worth the money.
This is the most well-thought-out post I've seen on this thread.
|
China6326 Posts
Compared to what we saw in the RTS genre, hell let's say about half of the industry, we are really lucky enough that the developer of the game we play actually gives it a damn.
|
On October 01 2016 03:35 digmouse wrote:
Compared to what we saw in the RTS genre, hell let's say about half of the industry, we are really lucky enough that the developer of the game we play actually gives it a damn.
I agree. I'm disappointed there are so few hardcore RTS players out there. It's like bull-riding, a punishing hobby for sure.
|
On September 30 2016 21:47 JackONeill wrote: I can't excuse it from a company that's been harvesting shitons of cash from WoW and Diablo III (which was also incomplete on release and a total rip off).
Blizzard was 100% transparent about what is and is not in the game upon release. They continue to be 100% transparent about D3. Part of transparency means you'll see features that come close to implementation, but do not make it. Creating software is ugly business when you peel back the curtain. Features get dropped all the time. New stuff gets added last minute. Consumers are seeing more and more of this as companies choose to be more transparent about their development processes. Only in the dreamworld of an infant does every need, want, and desire get instantly met with little effort. As the infant grows into a child and things occasionally don't go their way that 3 year old will often rage into a screaming fit of anger. Some chronological adults continue to process their life events through the eyes of a child. So we occasionally see rage posts about how horrible Blizzard is. When, in fact, the parent Blizzard is giving the child more fun than they could ever conceive.
the majority of D3's 30+ million in sales occurred more than 7.5 months after the game's initial release. the vast majority of the people buying the game knew exactly what they were getting. D3's long term success and active player base more than 4 years after initial release are objective proof of its quality.
Here is what the makers of Torchlight 2 have to say about D3: "Let’s admit it, Diablo 3 is killing it right now. Diablo 3 is a really fun game. "
http://ca.ign.com/articles/2015/08/31/pax-2015-torchlight-3-isnt-happening-because-dev-is-burnt-out
there are other aRPGs and RTS games out there. you are not obligated to play Blizzard's stuff. However, Blizzard's ability to engage customer on a long term basis provides objective proof of their quality product.
The parent//child paradigm between Blizzard and some of its customers is both amusing and troubling at the same time.
|
United States97274 Posts
so the banner is rank 1 GM as random but only diamond as zerg and plat as terran?
|
On October 01 2016 05:26 Shellshock wrote:
so the banner is rank 1 GM as random but only diamond as zerg and plat as terran?
He tells the opponents the wrong race, easiest GM ever
|
This is fantastic! I considered buying another copy of the game so I could play off-race without mucking-up my primary MMR, but now I won't have to do that. Haven't had much time for SC lately, but this is definitely exciting news, so maybe I'll start playing again.
|
Sooo, what is you experience with off-race MMR ladder? I don't quite get why off-race should have the same MMR even initially as the main... shouldn't all off-race start from the lowest level? 
|
On October 27 2016 01:51 BaneRiders wrote:Sooo, what is you experience with off-race MMR ladder? I don't quite get why off-race should have the same MMR even initially as the main... shouldn't all off-race start from the lowest level?
Determining what's the main race and what the off races are initially is problematic though. Like what do you do if someone has played 70 games as Protoss with a 60% win-rate, 100 games as Terran with a 50% win-rate, and 10 games as Zerg with a 80% win-rate? What counts as their main race?
Either way by next season everything should be fine.
|
On October 27 2016 02:00 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 01:51 BaneRiders wrote:Sooo, what is you experience with off-race MMR ladder? I don't quite get why off-race should have the same MMR even initially as the main... shouldn't all off-race start from the lowest level? Determining what's the main race and what the off races are initially is problematic though. Like what do you do if someone has played 70 games as Protoss with a 60% win-rate, 100 games as Terran with a 50% win-rate, and 10 games as Zerg with a 80% win-rate? What counts as their main race? Either way by next season everything should be fine.
edit : nvm can't read
I'm still waiting to see if they're gonna change those tier boundaries, having everyone in master kinda ruins the point of trying to reach it, as i myself got boosted in there.
Now i don't know if i should risk losing 200 MMR in 3 games and then see them change master 3 requirements to 4800 or something
|
I played enough terran so that my MMR is way lower then my main (zerg), and now I can see improvement as well (got a few leagues higher with terran now).
It placed me with protoss in the same league as my main, but I won more than half of the games, so I guess it had no choice.
The question is were my opponents offracing as well, or were these wins just the same as my Zerg and Terran wins,
I like the new MMR per race system, I can improve each race. I was using the unranked MMR to offrace with protoss , but it didn't allow me offracing with terran, so now I can do that as well. And what considers the MMR, then its just about playing enough games (no matter if it starts from scratch or as my main one).
The system doesn't really know which race is my main one, so starting from scratch for offrace means starting from scratch for my main race as well.
I am pleased
|
On October 27 2016 02:00 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 01:51 BaneRiders wrote:Sooo, what is you experience with off-race MMR ladder? I don't quite get why off-race should have the same MMR even initially as the main... shouldn't all off-race start from the lowest level? Determining what's the main race and what the off races are initially is problematic though. Like what do you do if someone has played 70 games as Protoss with a 60% win-rate, 100 games as Terran with a 50% win-rate, and 10 games as Zerg with a 80% win-rate? What counts as their main race? Either way by next season everything should be fine.
I thought that the first race you place would be considered your main, simple as that. Maybe this is not the case?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
