|
The beta is getting closer and closer.
https://eu.battle.net/login/
https://us.battle.net/login/
"All Blizzard Accounts have been converted into new Battle.net accounts."
Incase for some weird reason you have not yet set up a Blizzard account, set one up to be able to opt-in for starcraft II beta.
Blizzard Beta Opt-In
By opting in, this Battle.net account will have a chance to be invited to beta tests for upcoming Blizzard Entertainment games.
Where is the opt-in option?
+ Show Spoiler +
Battle.net Account FAQ
+ Show Spoiler + .
Battle.net Account FAQ
What is a Battle.net account?
As part of our ongoing improvements to Battle.net, we are introducing a centralized account system that will let players manage all of their Blizzard Entertainment games, including World of Warcraft and future games, in one place without having to remember multiple sets of login information.
What are the benefits of creating and using a Battle.net account?
The new Battle.net account allows you to log in to World of Warcraft, manage purchases at the online Blizzard Store, keep track of CD keys for your Blizzard Entertainment games, access our websites (such as the World of Warcraft Armory), opt in to upcoming beta tests, and more using a single login -- just your email address and a password. In the future, we plan to add more features, including tools to make it easier for friends to communicate between games and to help bring our community of players closer together.
Are these Battle.net accounts related to Blizzard accounts?
Battle.net accounts are an evolution of the existing Blizzard accounts. If you already use a Blizzard account, you do not need to create a new Battle.net account -- the Blizzard account has been automatically converted, and people with existing Blizzard accounts have received an email containing more information.
I already have a classic Battle.net account that I made for StarCraft, Warcraft III, and/or Diablo II. Can I just use that?
No, the new Battle.net Accounts are separate from classic Battle.net accounts for StarCraft, Warcraft III, and Diablo II. To allow for the Battle.net features we have planned, we've built the new Battle.net account system from the ground up for World of Warcraft and upcoming games such as StarCraft II and Diablo III. In order to play Warcraft III, Diablo II, and StarCraft on Battle.net, you will still need to log in using your "classic" Battle.net login information.
How are World of Warcraft accounts related to Battle.net accounts?
Think of a Battle.net account as a key-ring that can hold up to 8 World of Warcraft accounts. To merge a World of Warcraft account with a Battle.net account, visit the Battle.net / World of Warcraft Account Merge page and follow the instructions there. Repeat the process for each World of Warcraft account you wish to merge.
I play World of Warcraft using multiple accounts -- why should I merge all of them into the same Battle.net account?
One of our long-term goals for Battle.net is to introduce community and communication features that will make it beneficial for players to have all of the accounts and games they play associated with their own, single online identity. Merging all of your World of Warcraft accounts into one Battle.net account will enable you to take full advantage of these features in the future. We'll have more information to share about our plans in the coming months.
My family plays World of Warcraft together. Should we create a single Battle.net account for all of our World of Warcraft accounts?
No. Sharing access to a World of Warcraft account, other than by a parent or guardian with a single minor, is a violation of World of Warcraft's Terms of Use. You should create a separate Battle.net account for each family member's World of Warcraft account. In addition, future Battle.net features will make it beneficial for players to have the Battle.net account they use associated with their own online identity. Creating separate accounts for you and your family ensures you will be able to take advantage of these features when they are introduced later on.
How do I log in to the game after I've merged a World of Warcraft account to a Battle.net account?
After you complete the account merge process, you will use the Battle.net account information (i.e. the email address and password you designated) to log into World of Warcraft. The old World of Warcraft account name will no longer be used to log in to the game, the World of Warcraft forums, or the Armory.
How do I log in if I've merged multiple World of Warcraft accounts?
After you log in to World of Warcraft using the Battle.net account, you will be prompted to select which of the merged World of Warcraft accounts you wish to play. Players with multiple World of Warcraft accounts are still able to log in and play them simultaneously.
Is creating a Battle.net account required to play World of Warcraft?
Currently, creating a Battle.net account and merging World of Warcraft accounts is entirely optional. However, as we continue to build additional functionality into the new Battle.net, we will eventually require all active World of Warcraft accounts to migrate over to Battle.net accounts in order to continue playing. Additionally, all future Blizzard Entertainment games such as StarCraft II and Diablo III will require Battle.net accounts.
Why will Battle.net accounts be mandatory to play World of Warcraft in the future?
With the upcoming releases of StarCraft II and Diablo III, having one unified account system allows us to ensure the highest-quality user experience and customer support for our players. In addition, the new Battle.net account system will give World of Warcraft players access to certain future Battle.net service features and updates (as applicable).
What happens if I change my email address?
If you change your primary email address in Battle.net Account Management, the Battle.net account name will change automatically, and you will log in using the updated email address. All of your game associations and online Blizzard Store purchases will stay linked to the account, and you will not have to create a new account, re-merge any World of Warcraft subscriptions, or re-purchase any games.
How will I log in to Blizzard Entertainment forums after creating a Battle.net account?
To access the World of Warcraft forums, you will log in using the new Battle.net account. After doing so, you will be able to select which merged World of Warcraft account and character you wish to use to post. To access the classic Battle.net forums (including the existing StarCraft II and Diablo III forums there), you will continue to log in as you have in the past. As we add community features to the new Battle.net, our forums will continue to evolve. We'll be able to share more about our plans in the future.
Sign me up! How do I create a new Battle.net account?
Simply start here and follow the instructions to create a new Battle.net account.
Is there a subscription fee or a creation fee?
No, there is no subscription or creation fee for creating a Battle.net account.
Will Battle.net accounts include parental controls?
In the future, we plan to add parental controls similar to the ones now available in World of Warcraft Account Management.
Isn't it a bit risky to link all my games to one password? What if someone steals my Battle.net account?
Security has always been one of our top priorities, and that's true of Battle.net accounts, too. For related information and security advice, please visit here.
Will my Blizzard Authenticator still work?
Yes. If you use a Blizzard Authenticator, you will need it when merging the associated World of Warcraft account into the new Battle.net account. The Authenticator will automatically transfer to the Battle.net account during the merge process. You will still need it when managing Battle.net account information and logging in to the game. For more information on the security benefits of the Blizzard Authenticator, visit here.
What happens if I play on multiple World of Warcraft accounts and use Authenticators for each one?
When merging each World of Warcraft account to a Battle.net account, you will need to enter information for each account's Authenticator. However, once all of the accounts are merged, you will only need the Authenticator used for the first World of Warcraft account you merged. You may give away, sell, store, or dispose of your additional Authenticators, as they are no longer needed.
Can I add a Blizzard Authenticator to a Battle.net account before merging a World of Warcraft account?
You must first merge a World of Warcraft account into a Battle.net account before options to add a Blizzard Authenticator will appear in Battle.net Account Management.
|
Northern Ireland1200 Posts
And the battle.net forums are down at the moment too. New b.net logo looks interesting
|
|
|
ohh looks nice.
As for beta, I have a feeling it's still a ways away since Blizzard seems to have a LOT of opportunities to get in the beta in the future
|
|
|
On March 20 2009 04:15 blabber wrote:
ohh looks nice.
As for beta, I have a feeling it's still a ways away since Blizzard seems to have a LOT of opportunities to get in the beta in the future
Indeed, but keep in mind when beta opens that's not just going to be the end of the beta key handout. With an opt-in for example you'll still have a fair chance to get into the beta on the 2nd or 3rd wave of release of keys (or further for that matter). Same will continue to go on with fansite's and contests I would guess.
Time will tell, but I would bet on late april - mid may.
|
Oh god, brief butterflies in stomach from this
|
United States3824 Posts
To many WoW questions for comfort 
|
On March 20 2009 04:23 inReacH wrote:
Oh god, brief butterflies in stomach from this
Goosebumps here 
|
oooohhh.... its all pretty....
funny how the WoW players need so many questions answered 
|
I just played a warcraft 3 tower defense for like 15 hours(notjoking) and then read this and am feeling euphoric.
|
omg omg omg
Blizzard Beta Opt-In
By opting in, this Battle.net account will have a chance to be invited to beta tests for upcoming Blizzard Entertainment games.
Continue
|
I hate to be negative about this, because overall it sounds good....
But I swear to god if they turn Battle.net into Steam I'll kill myself.
|
On March 20 2009 04:33 Mikilatov wrote:
I hate to be negative about this, because overall it sounds good....
But I swear to god if they turn Battle.net into Steam I'll kill myself.
Out of curiosity why? Steam is great.
|
I signed up, I hope I'm a lucky one who will receive a Beta Key before you guys!
|
Hard to put my finger on why, but this makes me feel nervous.
|
On March 20 2009 04:51 ManWithCheese wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 04:33 Mikilatov wrote:
I hate to be negative about this, because overall it sounds good....
But I swear to god if they turn Battle.net into Steam I'll kill myself. Out of curiosity why? Steam is great.
I don't need a program to manage my games for me, let alone a different program for each company that decides to switch to this system -- I already have one of those and it's called Windows.
I just want to play my damn games, not have to log into some system, be bothered by random invites and messages, jump through a bunch of news, advertising, and mandatory updates every week for shit I don't even use.
You're forced to go through all that shit everytime you play, instead of just clicking on the game you want to play in the first place.
I really hope this Blizzard Account thing doesn't expand into that, because thus far, the net functionality of it seems pretty awesome as is, as far as combining accounts, logins, and product registrations -- without all the pointless bullcrap 'functionality' that Steam has.
We already have Steam, and even worse -- EA Download Manager. No more, please. I know how to manage a start menu and download patches.
|
Getting pumped
|
I wonder if they'll have any sort of preference system for who gets to participate in the opt-in (assuming there is one open to the public) or if it will just be random chance.
|
i have a WoW account i demand priority for SC2 beta testing since im throwing away money on WoW
|
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet.
|
On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet.
Yes, good bye smurfing.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing.
Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account".
IE:
Master Account: FrozenArbiter
SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE]
..... ETC.
|
On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet.
You can merge up to 8 WoW accounts to your Bnet account, so I wouldn't be surprised if you could have multiple accounts here as well. Much like the system Relic has for Company of Heroes, just a bit more restrictive.
man, I am pumped!
|
On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC.
I believe will we have to use our email address to log into SC2 Bnet.
|
Anyone not able to log in even with a correct password? It just goes to the login page again.
|
On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC.
They could but why? They don't like smurfing as it screws with the AMM system.
WoW is a different story as you don't have to pay any concerns to that, and having multiple WoW accounts is useful, can't say the same about SC 2.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On March 20 2009 06:13 SearingShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. I believe will we have to use our email address to log into SC2 Bnet.
I don't think there's ANY way that'd be the case ;p What, your display ID in game is going to be "Johnny_88@hotmail.com" ? Doubt it!
On March 20 2009 06:15 Eury wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. They could but why? They don't like smurfing as it screws with the AMM system. WoW is a different story as you don't have to pay any concerns to that, and having multiple WoW accounts is useful, can't say the same about SC 2.
Maybe because lots of people (like me) are going to be pissed off? Smurfing screws with AMM how? Smurfing simply means playing on an account other than the one you are known for, and if it's so detrimental, then you could simply have the AMM rank associated with the master account.
Not being able to make more than 1 ID is complete fucking bullshit, what if your younger brother/sister wants to play? They are going to have to play on your hardcore lvl 50 top 100 ladder account -_-? (for this reason I think having AMM rank tied to master account could be bad)
What if you want to goof around with a secondary race? What if you are Boxer and don't want 500 people to whisper you as soon as you enter the channel? Ugh, restrictions like this are quite simply BULLSHIT.
Going backwards in convenience is completely unacceptable to me (much like how WC3 removed online replay watchability).
|
On March 20 2009 06:16 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 06:13 SearingShadow wrote:On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. I believe will we have to use our email address to log into SC2 Bnet. I don't think there's ANY way that'd be the case ;p What, your display ID in game is going to be "Johnny_88@hotmail.com" ? Doubt it!
Didn't think about that. ^_^
|
You will probably login with your email but you will also have an online nick.
Now, when I have put some thought in to it, maybe you can have multiple nicks/accounts but your stats might be tied across them all when it comes to the AMM to decide what skill level you have.
That would remove smurfing but still allow you to have multiple "accounts".
|
oh snap, i never bothered to set up an at blizzard. time to do it now for the opt-in haha. thanks noth1n for the notice
|
HTTP Status 403
|
On March 20 2009 06:16 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 06:13 SearingShadow wrote:On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. I believe will we have to use our email address to log into SC2 Bnet. I don't think there's ANY way that'd be the case ;p What, your display ID in game is going to be "Johnny_88@hotmail.com" ? Doubt it! Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 06:15 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. They could but why? They don't like smurfing as it screws with the AMM system. WoW is a different story as you don't have to pay any concerns to that, and having multiple WoW accounts is useful, can't say the same about SC 2. Maybe because lots of people (like me) are going to be pissed off? Smurfing screws with AMM how? Smurfing simply means playing on an account other than the one you are known for, and if it's so detrimental, then you could simply have the AMM rank associated with the master account. Not being able to make more than 1 ID is complete fucking bullshit, what if your younger brother/sister wants to play? They are going to have to play on your hardcore lvl 50 top 100 ladder account -_-? (for this reason I think having AMM rank tied to master account could be bad) What if you want to goof around with a secondary race? What if you are Boxer and don't want 500 people to whisper you as soon as you enter the channel? Ugh, restrictions like this are quite simply BULLSHIT. Going backwards in convenience is completely unacceptable to me (much like how WC3 removed online replay watchability).
People tend to dislike getting completely owned in games. Good players that decide to create smurf accounts is a form of griefing that might ruin another player's multiplayer experience. If I was Blizzard I would take that very serious; they want to expand the multiplayer market and things like smurfing hinders that.
Regarding siblings, if you read the FAQ, they make it pretty clear that they want your account to be an unique online ID. They don't want you to share your account to siblings or anyone else.
Finally regarding your last point that would be solved if you could have different online nicks tied to your master account but the stats were shared across all nicks. They could also track your skill level per race if they believe that it is a big enough issue.
But even without multiple nicks, I'm sure that Bnet 2 will have a much more robust ignore system; like only allowing PMs from your friends.
|
If getting swarmed with whispers saying "OMG ITS BOXER" is a problem, Blizzard could easily implement a feature that blocks out all whispers unless that person is in your friends list.
Blizzard is really pushing the whole community thing with Bnet similar to Steam. I imagine it will play out in a similar way.
|
anybody tried logging in? does it work?
|
On March 20 2009 06:45 SirNeb wrote:
anybody tried logging in? does it work?
the US one seems to work fine but I get a database error on the EU one
anyone have any luck with the EU site?
EDIT: EU site seems to work fine now
|
EU is still beeing implemented atm, should be online within next 24h is my guess.
|
I am in fine on the US one. Added my wow, SC, D2, and WC3 account also ... all into this one Battle.net account.
Seems like a lot of people are having login issues now tho... probably from high volume. Might be best to try again later.
|
On March 20 2009 06:45 SirNeb wrote:
anybody tried logging in? does it work?
I logged into the US one and got to a new TOS agreement, which I agreed to, but then it kicked me back out to the login screen and now logging in just keeps returning me to the login screen.
|
EU one just go on! You can spam f5 a bit if you have nothing better to do, just expect many errors till you get a steady connection.
*cough* daum *cough*
|
Shit like this makes me so FREAKING excited. Even though it means very little right now.
|
On March 20 2009 06:55 tec27 wrote:I logged into the US one and got to a new TOS agreement, which I agreed to, but then it kicked me back out to the login screen and now logging in just keeps returning me to the login screen.
Something similar happened to me. I was able to manage my account and merge my WoW, but then I logged out and was unable to log back in. It just keeps me at the login screen.
I'm guessing the website is just getting swarmed at the moment, seeing as how the WoW players were just notified of it.
EDIT: Oh, it's working now. I'm guessing it's just heavy traffic.
|
On March 20 2009 06:55 tec27 wrote:I logged into the US one and got to a new TOS agreement, which I agreed to, but then it kicked me back out to the login screen and now logging in just keeps returning me to the login screen.
Okay I guess it's not up and running yet. Same thing happened to me.
|
The US one is definitely active, you guys just running into the high volume areas.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On March 20 2009 06:38 Eury wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 06:16 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:13 SearingShadow wrote:On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. I believe will we have to use our email address to log into SC2 Bnet. I don't think there's ANY way that'd be the case ;p What, your display ID in game is going to be "Johnny_88@hotmail.com" ? Doubt it! On March 20 2009 06:15 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. They could but why? They don't like smurfing as it screws with the AMM system. WoW is a different story as you don't have to pay any concerns to that, and having multiple WoW accounts is useful, can't say the same about SC 2. Maybe because lots of people (like me) are going to be pissed off? Smurfing screws with AMM how? Smurfing simply means playing on an account other than the one you are known for, and if it's so detrimental, then you could simply have the AMM rank associated with the master account. Not being able to make more than 1 ID is complete fucking bullshit, what if your younger brother/sister wants to play? They are going to have to play on your hardcore lvl 50 top 100 ladder account -_-? (for this reason I think having AMM rank tied to master account could be bad) What if you want to goof around with a secondary race? What if you are Boxer and don't want 500 people to whisper you as soon as you enter the channel? Ugh, restrictions like this are quite simply BULLSHIT. Going backwards in convenience is completely unacceptable to me (much like how WC3 removed online replay watchability). People tend to dislike getting completely owned in games. Good players that decide to create smurf accounts is a form of griefing that might ruin another player's multiplayer experience. If I was Blizzard I would take that very serious; they want to expand the multiplayer market and things like smurfing hinders that.
.. And I tend to dislike being stuck on the same account for all eternity/might want to just play for fun (ie secondary race, fuck around strats) without ruining my hard obtained ladder rank/might want to practice in secret.
Seriously, let's say I start off as FrozenArbiter, then I want to join a clan? FrozenArbiter [Liquid] (just an example ;p) looks infinitely uglier than, say, Liquid'Arbiter.
Regarding siblings, if you read the FAQ, they make it pretty clear that they want your account to be an unique online ID. They don't want you to share your account to siblings or anyone else.
Regardless of intention, expecting people (who might even have just 1 computer..) to buy TWO copies of the game, is completely unrealistic (also, complete bullshit).
Finally regarding your last point that would be solved if you could have different online nicks tied to your master account but the stats were shared across all nicks. They could also track your skill level per race if they believe that it is a big enough issue.
But even without multiple nicks, I'm sure that Bnet 2 will have a much more robust ignore system; like only allowing PMs from your friends.
Yes I brought that up as well. Ignore system solves very little tho, being able to practice in secret is only fixed by allowing you to smurf -_-
|
Wow this shit looks so nice when i added my scbw was CRAZY gosu sound
|
On March 20 2009 06:59 404.Nintu wrote:
Shit like this makes me so FREAKING excited. Even though it means very little right now.
Lucky man with a beta key I guess. /envy
updated op with OPT-in location, incase someone missed.
|
United States12235 Posts
On March 20 2009 05:31 Savio wrote:
Hard to put my finger on why, but this makes me feel nervous.
I can tell you why. They tried a beta test of the unified account system (which were called Blizzard Accounts) during the F&F alpha of WotLK. It was an abysmal and utter failure, with the account creation system constantly being down, people getting stuck because they created an account but didn't get a password emailed to them, passwords not being saved by the system, etc. It was horrible and required a lot of intervention by Blizzard customer service reps and account managers. And that's beyond the potential security concerns that may arise.
I can see some potential benefits to the system, particularly if it supports Web interaction like the WoW Armory. I foresee something like a Web-based, Battle.net Account-based meta-friends list which would encompass all games. They could even go as far as to implement Battle.net Account friends list within their games, viewable as overlays or via launchers like Steam or X360. Something like that would be pretty convenient.
I don't envision the confusion and hysteria that some of the people in this thread are predicting. It will probably be something like Launch Game > Login with Battle.net Account > Create/Select Username or WoW Account > Enter Battle.net, which is very simple. Convenient (but also dangerous) that you would only need a single password, though you would be protected completely if you had an Authenticator.
|
On March 20 2009 06:38 Eury wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 06:16 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:13 SearingShadow wrote:On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. I believe will we have to use our email address to log into SC2 Bnet. I don't think there's ANY way that'd be the case ;p What, your display ID in game is going to be "Johnny_88@hotmail.com" ? Doubt it! On March 20 2009 06:15 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. They could but why? They don't like smurfing as it screws with the AMM system. WoW is a different story as you don't have to pay any concerns to that, and having multiple WoW accounts is useful, can't say the same about SC 2. Maybe because lots of people (like me) are going to be pissed off? Smurfing screws with AMM how? Smurfing simply means playing on an account other than the one you are known for, and if it's so detrimental, then you could simply have the AMM rank associated with the master account. Not being able to make more than 1 ID is complete fucking bullshit, what if your younger brother/sister wants to play? They are going to have to play on your hardcore lvl 50 top 100 ladder account -_-? (for this reason I think having AMM rank tied to master account could be bad) What if you want to goof around with a secondary race? What if you are Boxer and don't want 500 people to whisper you as soon as you enter the channel? Ugh, restrictions like this are quite simply BULLSHIT. Going backwards in convenience is completely unacceptable to me (much like how WC3 removed online replay watchability). People tend to dislike getting completely owned in games. Good players that decide to create smurf accounts is a form of griefing that might ruin another player's multiplayer experience. If I was Blizzard I would take that very serious; they want to expand the multiplayer market and things like smurfing hinders that. Regarding siblings, if you read the FAQ, they make it pretty clear that they want your account to be an unique online ID. They don't want you to share your account to siblings or anyone else. Finally regarding your last point that would be solved if you could have different online nicks tied to your master account but the stats were shared across all nicks. They could also track your skill level per race if they believe that it is a big enough issue. But even without multiple nicks, I'm sure that Bnet 2 will have a much more robust ignore system; like only allowing PMs from your friends.
Your argument is very self-concerning. As much as newbies don't like being pitted against a gosu, A gosu sometimes doesn't want to be pitted against another gosu. And I of course use the term Gosu lightly. What if I wanted to off-race, try new builds, was really tired or on painkillers? You should be able to ladder without it being tied to your main account. Pretty much everyone above C- have multiple smurf accounts, including progamers.
I released some FPvods awhile ago and since then, I've joined a few games to have like "ZOMG, Nintu from TL. it would be awesome if I beat you." It's all good fun but sometimes if I'm in a bad mood, I don't need the stress of thinking that I am being judged by my play or some junk like that. If I couldn't smurf, I would play considerably less Starcraft. And I'm sure a lot of people feel the same about that. (Majority of C- and above)
To be honest, I think the current iccup system is completely perfect. You have the freedom to smurf, and yes, sometimes when you rise the ranks early season, you'll get smashed by really good players. I played haypro 3 times last night and clearstats'd out of frustration. (lawl?) When I found out it was Haypro I didn't mind the rape as much. And even in my frustration that moment, it was more about my level of play which wasn't very strong, not about being matched against an A-.
So I can see your point of not liking being raped at D by A's. But you also have to consider that SC2 seasons will probably be a lot longer, and once a good player get's B equiv on sc2, he probably wouldn't enjoy playing genuine D's. He'd probably smurf on a C account. From what I've seen, not many 'good' players really enjoy sitting at D rank to bash you. They're just there on their way to C so they can get casual, anonymous practice against slightly worse players than they're used to.
Multiple accounts are necessary for offracing, new builds, intoxicated/tired conditions, etc..
"Hey, I didn't qualify for that tour because last night I wanted to see what laddering as Z was like. I'm going to go kill myself."
Headline: Man kills himself over unfair multiple account limitations on video game.
|
Ahhhh, feels good to be opt-ed in for beta. Added my WoW and Starcraft games as well, the system look pretty sleek. Interestingly, I'm now only able to log into WoW using my battle.net ID, and it says the login server is down. So, yeah, I guess it's getting swarmed atm. Good thing I have to finish my essay anyways.
|
On March 20 2009 07:44 GGQ wrote:
Ahhhh, feels good to be opt-ed in for beta.
How did you do that? Does having the new bnet account automatically do it? I'm planning on having a bunch of friends sign up for the beta so I have a better chance. Am I missing something?
Oh, I see the communication preferences that has a check box for opt-ins. Hopefully there will be some sort of public announcement about sc2 opt-ins soon.
|
On March 20 2009 07:06 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 06:38 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 06:16 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:13 SearingShadow wrote:On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. I believe will we have to use our email address to log into SC2 Bnet. I don't think there's ANY way that'd be the case ;p What, your display ID in game is going to be "Johnny_88@hotmail.com" ? Doubt it! On March 20 2009 06:15 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. They could but why? They don't like smurfing as it screws with the AMM system. WoW is a different story as you don't have to pay any concerns to that, and having multiple WoW accounts is useful, can't say the same about SC 2. Maybe because lots of people (like me) are going to be pissed off? Smurfing screws with AMM how? Smurfing simply means playing on an account other than the one you are known for, and if it's so detrimental, then you could simply have the AMM rank associated with the master account. Not being able to make more than 1 ID is complete fucking bullshit, what if your younger brother/sister wants to play? They are going to have to play on your hardcore lvl 50 top 100 ladder account -_-? (for this reason I think having AMM rank tied to master account could be bad) What if you want to goof around with a secondary race? What if you are Boxer and don't want 500 people to whisper you as soon as you enter the channel? Ugh, restrictions like this are quite simply BULLSHIT. Going backwards in convenience is completely unacceptable to me (much like how WC3 removed online replay watchability). People tend to dislike getting completely owned in games. Good players that decide to create smurf accounts is a form of griefing that might ruin another player's multiplayer experience. If I was Blizzard I would take that very serious; they want to expand the multiplayer market and things like smurfing hinders that. .. And I tend to dislike being stuck on the same account for all eternity/might want to just play for fun (ie secondary race, fuck around strats) without ruining my hard obtained ladder rank/might want to practice in secret. Seriously, let's say I start off as FrozenArbiter, then I want to join a clan? FrozenArbiter [Liquid] (just an example ;p) looks infinitely uglier than, say, Liquid'Arbiter. Show nested quote +
Regarding siblings, if you read the FAQ, they make it pretty clear that they want your account to be an unique online ID. They don't want you to share your account to siblings or anyone else.
Regardless of intention, expecting people (who might even have just 1 computer..) to buy TWO copies of the game, is completely unrealistic (also, complete bullshit). Show nested quote +
Finally regarding your last point that would be solved if you could have different online nicks tied to your master account but the stats were shared across all nicks. They could also track your skill level per race if they believe that it is a big enough issue.
But even without multiple nicks, I'm sure that Bnet 2 will have a much more robust ignore system; like only allowing PMs from your friends.
Yes I brought that up as well. Ignore system solves very little tho, being able to practice in secret is only fixed by allowing you to smurf -_-
Well, I'm afraid that you might be disappointed by some of the changes then. Sometime you just have to take the good with the bad.
I think an unique ID is a great idea; not least from a business perspective. If you can't create smurf accounts most people won't share their accounts to their friends/siblings (they don't want anyone to mess with their stats) thus forcing them to buy their own copy of the game.
I'm sure PRO players can afford buying multiple copies of the game if they for some reason really need to smurf.
To me it make more sense playing regular games on the ladder and then practice the more secret stuff in private custom games against specific training partners.
|
I certainly wouldn't mind a single account having multiple ladder stats for experimentation or off-race purposes, but I still feel that they have to be limited somehow.
Most of you are only looking at smurfing from the pro-gamer point of view. But not everybody is interested in being a pro, and most casual gamers just want to play the game and have a good time. Getting continually smashed by smurfers all the time isn't fun, and for many casuals it would discourage them from playing the game altogether. Ladders should have a place that both pros and casuals can have fun at, not just pros alone.
Maybe a good solution would to allow an account to have an "off-race" side account to practice with that has its own separate stats. It would be a limited number however, since being able to endlessly create smurfs would be unfair to casuals.
|
When you are creating your new battle.net account, it'll give you an option to opt in for future betas. If you missed it while creating the account, just log in to your account, and it's under Communication Preferences.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
So I can see your point of not liking being raped at D by A's. But you also have to consider that SC2 seasons will probably be a lot longer, and once a good player get's B equiv on sc2, he probably wouldn't enjoy playing genuine D's. He'd probably smurf on a C account. From what I've seen, not many 'good' players really enjoy sitting at D rank to bash you. They're just there on their way to C so they can get casual, anonymous practice against slightly worse players than they're used to.
It should be noted that smurfing really doesn't have anything to do with playing lower ranked opponents. If BoxeR has a level 50 account and then decides to run a smurf account up to LVL 50 as well, he's smurfing when he's playing on it.
On March 20 2009 07:50 Eury wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 07:06 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:38 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 06:16 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:13 SearingShadow wrote:On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. I believe will we have to use our email address to log into SC2 Bnet. I don't think there's ANY way that'd be the case ;p What, your display ID in game is going to be "Johnny_88@hotmail.com" ? Doubt it! On March 20 2009 06:15 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. They could but why? They don't like smurfing as it screws with the AMM system. WoW is a different story as you don't have to pay any concerns to that, and having multiple WoW accounts is useful, can't say the same about SC 2. Maybe because lots of people (like me) are going to be pissed off? Smurfing screws with AMM how? Smurfing simply means playing on an account other than the one you are known for, and if it's so detrimental, then you could simply have the AMM rank associated with the master account. Not being able to make more than 1 ID is complete fucking bullshit, what if your younger brother/sister wants to play? They are going to have to play on your hardcore lvl 50 top 100 ladder account -_-? (for this reason I think having AMM rank tied to master account could be bad) What if you want to goof around with a secondary race? What if you are Boxer and don't want 500 people to whisper you as soon as you enter the channel? Ugh, restrictions like this are quite simply BULLSHIT. Going backwards in convenience is completely unacceptable to me (much like how WC3 removed online replay watchability). People tend to dislike getting completely owned in games. Good players that decide to create smurf accounts is a form of griefing that might ruin another player's multiplayer experience. If I was Blizzard I would take that very serious; they want to expand the multiplayer market and things like smurfing hinders that. .. And I tend to dislike being stuck on the same account for all eternity/might want to just play for fun (ie secondary race, fuck around strats) without ruining my hard obtained ladder rank/might want to practice in secret. Seriously, let's say I start off as FrozenArbiter, then I want to join a clan? FrozenArbiter [Liquid] (just an example ;p) looks infinitely uglier than, say, Liquid'Arbiter.
Regarding siblings, if you read the FAQ, they make it pretty clear that they want your account to be an unique online ID. They don't want you to share your account to siblings or anyone else.
Regardless of intention, expecting people (who might even have just 1 computer..) to buy TWO copies of the game, is completely unrealistic (also, complete bullshit).
Finally regarding your last point that would be solved if you could have different online nicks tied to your master account but the stats were shared across all nicks. They could also track your skill level per race if they believe that it is a big enough issue.
But even without multiple nicks, I'm sure that Bnet 2 will have a much more robust ignore system; like only allowing PMs from your friends.
Yes I brought that up as well. Ignore system solves very little tho, being able to practice in secret is only fixed by allowing you to smurf -_- Well, I'm afraid that you might be disappointed by some of the changes then. Sometime you just have to take the good with the bad. I think an unique ID is a great idea; not least from a business perspective. If you can't create smurf accounts most people won't share their accounts to their friends/siblings (they don't want anyone to mess with their stats) thus forcing them to buy their own copy of the game. I'm sure PRO players can afford buying multiple copies of the game if they for some reason really need to smurf. To me it make more sense playing regular games on the ladder and then practice the more secret stuff in private custom games against specific training partners.
Artifically forcing players to buy more copies of the game.. is bullshit. Being unable to simultaneously play with your brother without having 2 copies is enough, punishing people who can't do that anyway (ie have only 1 computer) is.. stupid -_-
I don't see why I should be satisfied with "the bad" when I could have all the good in SC or WC3 - it's a step backwards!
Furthermore, how do you want to handle people who only play from PC cafe's?
|
On March 20 2009 07:42 404.Nintu wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 06:38 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 06:16 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:13 SearingShadow wrote:On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. I believe will we have to use our email address to log into SC2 Bnet. I don't think there's ANY way that'd be the case ;p What, your display ID in game is going to be "Johnny_88@hotmail.com" ? Doubt it! On March 20 2009 06:15 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. They could but why? They don't like smurfing as it screws with the AMM system. WoW is a different story as you don't have to pay any concerns to that, and having multiple WoW accounts is useful, can't say the same about SC 2. Maybe because lots of people (like me) are going to be pissed off? Smurfing screws with AMM how? Smurfing simply means playing on an account other than the one you are known for, and if it's so detrimental, then you could simply have the AMM rank associated with the master account. Not being able to make more than 1 ID is complete fucking bullshit, what if your younger brother/sister wants to play? They are going to have to play on your hardcore lvl 50 top 100 ladder account -_-? (for this reason I think having AMM rank tied to master account could be bad) What if you want to goof around with a secondary race? What if you are Boxer and don't want 500 people to whisper you as soon as you enter the channel? Ugh, restrictions like this are quite simply BULLSHIT. Going backwards in convenience is completely unacceptable to me (much like how WC3 removed online replay watchability). People tend to dislike getting completely owned in games. Good players that decide to create smurf accounts is a form of griefing that might ruin another player's multiplayer experience. If I was Blizzard I would take that very serious; they want to expand the multiplayer market and things like smurfing hinders that. Regarding siblings, if you read the FAQ, they make it pretty clear that they want your account to be an unique online ID. They don't want you to share your account to siblings or anyone else. Finally regarding your last point that would be solved if you could have different online nicks tied to your master account but the stats were shared across all nicks. They could also track your skill level per race if they believe that it is a big enough issue. But even without multiple nicks, I'm sure that Bnet 2 will have a much more robust ignore system; like only allowing PMs from your friends. Your argument is very self-concerning. As much as newbies don't like being pitted against a gosu, A gosu sometimes doesn't want to be pitted against another gosu. And I of course use the term Gosu lightly. What if I wanted to off-race, try new builds, was really tired or on painkillers? You should be able to ladder without it being tied to your main account. Pretty much everyone above C- have multiple smurf accounts, including progamers. I released some FPvods awhile ago and since then, I've joined a few games to have like "ZOMG, Nintu from TL. it would be awesome if I beat you." It's all good fun but sometimes if I'm in a bad mood, I don't need the stress of thinking that I am being judged by my play or some junk like that. If I couldn't smurf, I would play considerably less Starcraft. And I'm sure a lot of people feel the same about that. (Majority of C- and above) To be honest, I think the current iccup system is completely perfect. You have the freedom to smurf, and yes, sometimes when you rise the ranks early season, you'll get smashed by really good players. I played haypro 3 times last night and clearstats'd out of frustration. (lawl?) When I found out it was Haypro I didn't mind the rape as much. And even in my frustration that moment, it was more about my level of play which wasn't very strong, not about being matched against an A-. So I can see your point of not liking being raped at D by A's. But you also have to consider that SC2 seasons will probably be a lot longer, and once a good player get's B equiv on sc2, he probably wouldn't enjoy playing genuine D's. He'd probably smurf on a C account. From what I've seen, not many 'good' players really enjoy sitting at D rank to bash you. They're just there on their way to C so they can get casual, anonymous practice against slightly worse players than they're used to. Multiple accounts are necessary for offracing, new builds, intoxicated/tired conditions, etc.. "Hey, I didn't qualify for that tour because last night I wanted to see what laddering as Z was like. I'm going to go kill myself." Headline: Man kills himself over unfair multiple account limitations on video game.
First of all you draw the conclusion that I'm one of those that needs protection from smurfs. That is interesting.
Besides those gosus as you call them are hardcore players. Those are players that will in most cases play the game anyhow.
"Newbies" outnumber "gosus" by a far margin. In other words they are more important from a business perspective. They are also more sensitive to their online experience. Getting completely stomped when they try to play the game in multiplayer won't encourage them to keep playing.
Regarding the rest of your concerns I have acknowledge them previously and I have suggested solutions for them.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
"Newbies" outnumber "gosus" by a far margin. In other words they are more important from a business perspective. They are also more sensitive to their online experience. Getting completely stomped when they try to play the game in multiplayer won't encourage them to keep playing.
And by the same reasoning this shouldn't matter at all as they have already bought the game.. -_-
Also, to elaborate on my previous point, it's gonna make it a lot harder to just casually drop by a PC cafe and play some games, if everyone in your group of people have to own the game being played to create an account >_<
|
On March 20 2009 08:01 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +"Newbies" outnumber "gosus" by a far margin. In other words they are more important from a business perspective. They are also more sensitive to their online experience. Getting completely stomped when they try to play the game in multiplayer won't encourage them to keep playing. And by the same reasoning this shouldn't matter at all as they have already bought the game.. -_-
It WILL however cause them to think twice about buying the expansions. If they can't have fun playing online just because Mr. Oh-So-Important Pro-gamer wants to take break, they will simply not buy any more SC2 games.
I think there are ways to cut down on smurfing without harming pro-gamers in the process, but smurfing IS an issue, and it shouldn't be left alone.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On March 20 2009 08:03 Spawkuring wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 08:01 FrozenArbiter wrote:"Newbies" outnumber "gosus" by a far margin. In other words they are more important from a business perspective. They are also more sensitive to their online experience. Getting completely stomped when they try to play the game in multiplayer won't encourage them to keep playing. And by the same reasoning this shouldn't matter at all as they have already bought the game.. -_- It WILL however cause them to think twice about buying the expansions. If they can't have fun playing online just because Mr. Oh-So-Important Pro-gamer wants to take break, they will simply not buy any more SC2 games. I think there are ways to cut down on smurfing without harming pro-gamers in the process, but smurfing IS an issue, and it shouldn't be left alone.
No they'll simply play UMS or buy it for the campaign. If someone can't handle getting stomped once every 20 games (seriously, smurfing progamers are going to stay low rank HOW LONG? not very long at all indeed), they are the kind of whiny bitch that will quit anyway.
Call me elitist if you want, but convenience > the sensibilites of whiny kids.
|
On March 20 2009 07:54 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +So I can see your point of not liking being raped at D by A's. But you also have to consider that SC2 seasons will probably be a lot longer, and once a good player get's B equiv on sc2, he probably wouldn't enjoy playing genuine D's. He'd probably smurf on a C account. From what I've seen, not many 'good' players really enjoy sitting at D rank to bash you. They're just there on their way to C so they can get casual, anonymous practice against slightly worse players than they're used to. It should be noted that smurfing really doesn't have anything to do with playing lower ranked opponents. If BoxeR has a level 50 account and then decides to run a smurf account up to LVL 50 as well, he's smurfing when he's playing on it. Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 07:50 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 07:06 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:38 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 06:16 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:13 SearingShadow wrote:On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. I believe will we have to use our email address to log into SC2 Bnet. I don't think there's ANY way that'd be the case ;p What, your display ID in game is going to be "Johnny_88@hotmail.com" ? Doubt it! On March 20 2009 06:15 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 06:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 06:04 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 05:48 SearingShadow wrote:
Does this mean we can only have one SC2 Bnet account?
You have to register your CD key with your email address and use your email address as a login name to Bnet. Yes, good bye smurfing. Hrm, not necessarily? I mean, you might be right but as far as I can tell, all this means is that your accounts for the various games will be tied to a "master account". IE: Master Account: FrozenArbiter SC2 ID: Dream.t)PltO [US WEST], Jinro [EUROPE] ..... ETC. They could but why? They don't like smurfing as it screws with the AMM system. WoW is a different story as you don't have to pay any concerns to that, and having multiple WoW accounts is useful, can't say the same about SC 2. Maybe because lots of people (like me) are going to be pissed off? Smurfing screws with AMM how? Smurfing simply means playing on an account other than the one you are known for, and if it's so detrimental, then you could simply have the AMM rank associated with the master account. Not being able to make more than 1 ID is complete fucking bullshit, what if your younger brother/sister wants to play? They are going to have to play on your hardcore lvl 50 top 100 ladder account -_-? (for this reason I think having AMM rank tied to master account could be bad) What if you want to goof around with a secondary race? What if you are Boxer and don't want 500 people to whisper you as soon as you enter the channel? Ugh, restrictions like this are quite simply BULLSHIT. Going backwards in convenience is completely unacceptable to me (much like how WC3 removed online replay watchability). People tend to dislike getting completely owned in games. Good players that decide to create smurf accounts is a form of griefing that might ruin another player's multiplayer experience. If I was Blizzard I would take that very serious; they want to expand the multiplayer market and things like smurfing hinders that. .. And I tend to dislike being stuck on the same account for all eternity/might want to just play for fun (ie secondary race, fuck around strats) without ruining my hard obtained ladder rank/might want to practice in secret. Seriously, let's say I start off as FrozenArbiter, then I want to join a clan? FrozenArbiter [Liquid] (just an example ;p) looks infinitely uglier than, say, Liquid'Arbiter.
Regarding siblings, if you read the FAQ, they make it pretty clear that they want your account to be an unique online ID. They don't want you to share your account to siblings or anyone else.
Regardless of intention, expecting people (who might even have just 1 computer..) to buy TWO copies of the game, is completely unrealistic (also, complete bullshit).
Finally regarding your last point that would be solved if you could have different online nicks tied to your master account but the stats were shared across all nicks. They could also track your skill level per race if they believe that it is a big enough issue.
But even without multiple nicks, I'm sure that Bnet 2 will have a much more robust ignore system; like only allowing PMs from your friends.
Yes I brought that up as well. Ignore system solves very little tho, being able to practice in secret is only fixed by allowing you to smurf -_- Well, I'm afraid that you might be disappointed by some of the changes then. Sometime you just have to take the good with the bad. I think an unique ID is a great idea; not least from a business perspective. If you can't create smurf accounts most people won't share their accounts to their friends/siblings (they don't want anyone to mess with their stats) thus forcing them to buy their own copy of the game. I'm sure PRO players can afford buying multiple copies of the game if they for some reason really need to smurf. To me it make more sense playing regular games on the ladder and then practice the more secret stuff in private custom games against specific training partners. Artifically forcing players to buy more copies of the game.. is bullshit. Being unable to simultaneously play with your brother without having 2 copies is enough, punishing people who can't do that anyway (ie have only 1 computer) is.. stupid -_- I don't see why I should be satisfied with "the bad" when I could have all the good in SC or WC3 - it's a step backwards! Furthermore, how do you want to handle people who only play from PC cafe's?
Well you can't have all the good in SC or WC3. SC 2 is a new game, you will lack that.
Plus all the new Bnet 2 features whatever that will be. And yes I'm sure there will be a few negative things that will follow Bnet 2 (like no seperate LAN option perhaps...).
That's what I meant with taking the good with the bad. There will be a lot of good stuff but I'm afraid there will be a couple of relative bad things too. That is a price you have to pay I'm afraid.
Regarding PC cafe's they might have separate cd keys that aren't tied to accounts, or cd keys will be tied to the account only and not at all to the installations. In the latter case you have to own a copy of the game obviously, but Blizzard might count on that most people interested in SC 2 will also own a copy.
|
On March 20 2009 08:05 FrozenArbiter wrote:
No they'll simply play UMS or buy it for the campaign. If someone can't handle getting stomped once every 20 games (seriously, smurfing progamers are going to stay low rank HOW LONG? not very long at all indeed), they are the kind of whiny bitch that will quit anyway.
Call me elitist if you want, but convenience > the sensibilites of whiny kids.
Going by that logic, I could easily say that pro-gamers who want to take a break can just play UMS instead, and that making a smurf account is completely unnecessary. But of course that isn't the case is it? Pros obviously want to make smurfs for their own reasons, and those reasons happen to put casuals at a disadvantage for enjoying the game. Like I said before, ladder should be open to both pros and casuals alike. Casuals shouldn't be locked out just because a pro wants to "crush noobs" to relax. Your enjoyment is no more important than anyone elses.
|
On March 20 2009 08:05 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 08:03 Spawkuring wrote:On March 20 2009 08:01 FrozenArbiter wrote:"Newbies" outnumber "gosus" by a far margin. In other words they are more important from a business perspective. They are also more sensitive to their online experience. Getting completely stomped when they try to play the game in multiplayer won't encourage them to keep playing. And by the same reasoning this shouldn't matter at all as they have already bought the game.. -_- It WILL however cause them to think twice about buying the expansions. If they can't have fun playing online just because Mr. Oh-So-Important Pro-gamer wants to take break, they will simply not buy any more SC2 games. I think there are ways to cut down on smurfing without harming pro-gamers in the process, but smurfing IS an issue, and it shouldn't be left alone. No they'll simply play UMS or buy it for the campaign. If someone can't handle getting stomped once every 20 games (seriously, smurfing progamers are going to stay low rank HOW LONG? not very long at all indeed), they are the kind of whiny bitch that will quit anyway. Call me elitist if you want, but convenience > the sensibilites of whiny kids.
Ahh, but you see Blizzard want to convert them to multiplayer gamers. People that play the game in multiplayer are usually a more loyal customer that comes back for more, and Blizzard can get increased revenue from them in form of banners, or other monetizing on Bnet.
|
This looks like the blizzard store.
in fact, I logged in with my details from the blizzard store where I had already opted-in to beta before.
|
Their main priority is e-sports. They want to create what BW did in Korea, but with SC2, so they can reap a lot of fucking royalties. (I assume.) Making sc2 not supportable by PC bangs, limiting the activity of gosu's and their ability to practice crazy builds and other races, aswell as not making the game family friendly by forcing your 11 year old son and your 13 year old son to buy separate copies, is just retarded.
Also, did they say anywhere that we can only have 1 ID? ID and Accounts are vastly different, as is shown in Diablo 2. By the way Eury writes it seems as if it's been announced that smurfs are dead and little jimmy and little franky have to buy their own copies to play the game. (on 1 computer.)
|
.
It has begun.
|
On March 20 2009 08:09 Spawkuring wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 08:05 FrozenArbiter wrote:
No they'll simply play UMS or buy it for the campaign. If someone can't handle getting stomped once every 20 games (seriously, smurfing progamers are going to stay low rank HOW LONG? not very long at all indeed), they are the kind of whiny bitch that will quit anyway.
Call me elitist if you want, but convenience > the sensibilites of whiny kids. Going by that logic, I could easily say that pro-gamers who want to take a break can just play UMS instead, and that making a smurf account is completely unnecessary. But of course that isn't the case is it? Pros obviously want to make smurfs for their own reasons, and those reasons happen to put casuals at a disadvantage for enjoying the game. Like I said before, ladder should be open to both pros and casuals alike. Casuals shouldn't be locked out just because a pro wants to "crush noobs" to relax. Your enjoyment is no more important than anyone elses.
The key difference is that anti-smurfing would be an entertainment limitation enforced by the company. As long as it's not destructive like hacking, let the players enjoy the game how they want.
Casuals are not forced to play public games against competitive players, and competitive players should not be forced into a single (or linked) account that discourages experimentation/offracing etc just to protect the egos of new players.
Edit: Anyone care to share their opinion regarding whether or not this screenshot is real? I assume it's fake, but my obsession and paranoia seek confirmation ![[image loading]](http://i40.tinypic.com/etv98k.jpg)
|
On March 20 2009 07:24 Excalibur_Z wrote:
I can tell you why. They tried a beta test of the unified account system (which were called Blizzard Accounts) during the F&F alpha of WotLK. It was an abysmal and utter failure, with the account creation system constantly being down, people getting stuck because they created an account but didn't get a password emailed to them, passwords not being saved by the system, etc. It was horrible and required a lot of intervention by Blizzard customer service reps and account managers.
Technical problems with an alpha system in a alpha is making you uncomfortable?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On March 20 2009 08:09 Spawkuring wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 08:05 FrozenArbiter wrote:
No they'll simply play UMS or buy it for the campaign. If someone can't handle getting stomped once every 20 games (seriously, smurfing progamers are going to stay low rank HOW LONG? not very long at all indeed), they are the kind of whiny bitch that will quit anyway.
Call me elitist if you want, but convenience > the sensibilites of whiny kids. Going by that logic, I could easily say that pro-gamers who want to take a break can just play UMS instead, and that making a smurf account is completely unnecessary. But of course that isn't the case is it? Pros obviously want to make smurfs for their own reasons, and those reasons happen to put casuals at a disadvantage for enjoying the game. Like I said before, ladder should be open to both pros and casuals alike. Casuals shouldn't be locked out just because a pro wants to "crush noobs" to relax. Your enjoyment is no more important than anyone elses.
.. You don't smurf to crush noobs, you smurf so that people won't know that it's you. So that you can try out things without people knowing it's you. Essentially, so that you can have some privacy if you are known in the community.
I wasn't super well-known when I played seriously, but I'm sure if you asked anyone with a ToT tag if the people begging for games was annoying, you'd get a resounding YES.
The progamer is OBVIOUSLY not going to stay at a low rank on his smurf account, since he'll be winning every game at the lower ranks -_-
The way you talk about it, it's like you think every good player would be constantly resetting to noob-bash their way to 15-0 and starting over again -_- No, not at all - that's sandbagging. It simply means playing on a different ID. I played 500 games on PGTour season on the ID Jinro. That was me smurfing, as the IDs I was known under were Dream.t)PltO and FrozenArbiter.
|
Also, Blizzard will almost DEFINITELY have a more sophisticated matching system. Unlike iccup, where your points are your only defining skill measure in a lobby, SC2 matching will probably take into consideration w:l ratio. A progamer going 6-0 against players who themselves are 6-2 or so, will certainly have a different impact on the matches. So that progamer will be out of your league in a matter of a few games, instead of lingering in the d/c- area for 20-25 games.
|
On March 20 2009 08:14 404.Nintu wrote:
Their main priority is e-sports. They want to create what BW did in Korea, but with SC2, so they can reap a lot of fucking royalties. (I assume.) Making sc2 not supportable by PC bangs, limiting the activity of gosu's and their ability to practice crazy builds and other races, aswell as not making the game family friendly by forcing your 11 year old son and your 13 year old son to buy separate copies, is just retarded.
Also, did they say anywhere that we can only have 1 ID? ID and Accounts are vastly different, as is shown in Diablo 2. By the way Eury writes it seems as if it's been announced that smurfs are dead and little jimmy and little franky have to buy their own copies to play the game. (on 1 computer.)
Of course it is only speculation, but I suggest you read the FAQ about the new account. It states pretty clear that their intention is to make an unique online ID. That means not sharing the account and there will be features tied to the account that will strongly discourage that.
Do you know what will help e-sport the most? It is to get more players in competitive gaming. To do that you make sure that everyone can easily find an opponent around the same skill level as themself. That means an AMM system that is easy and quick to use. Smurfs doesn't fit in in that system.
|
You will probably have unlimited names, but your stats will be linked, though invisible, across all names.
What this means is that each name has their own stats, but for the purposes of matchmaking, the matchmaker will be using your universal aggregated stats (which are hidden).
|
On March 20 2009 08:17 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 08:09 Spawkuring wrote:On March 20 2009 08:05 FrozenArbiter wrote:
No they'll simply play UMS or buy it for the campaign. If someone can't handle getting stomped once every 20 games (seriously, smurfing progamers are going to stay low rank HOW LONG? not very long at all indeed), they are the kind of whiny bitch that will quit anyway.
Call me elitist if you want, but convenience > the sensibilites of whiny kids. Going by that logic, I could easily say that pro-gamers who want to take a break can just play UMS instead, and that making a smurf account is completely unnecessary. But of course that isn't the case is it? Pros obviously want to make smurfs for their own reasons, and those reasons happen to put casuals at a disadvantage for enjoying the game. Like I said before, ladder should be open to both pros and casuals alike. Casuals shouldn't be locked out just because a pro wants to "crush noobs" to relax. Your enjoyment is no more important than anyone elses. .. You don't smurf to crush noobs, you smurf so that people won't know that it's you. So that you can try out things without people knowing it's you. Essentially, so that you can have some privacy if you are known in the community. I wasn't super well-known when I played seriously, but I'm sure if you asked anyone with a ToT tag if the people begging for games was annoying, you'd get a resounding YES. The progamer is OBVIOUSLY not going to stay at a low rank on his smurf account, since he'll be winning every game at the lower ranks -_- The way you talk about it, it's like you think every good player would be constantly resetting to noob-bash their way to 15-0 and starting over again -_- No, not at all - that's sandbagging. It simply means playing on a different ID. I played 500 games on PGTour season on the ID Jinro. That was me smurfing, as the IDs I was known under were Dream.t)PltO and FrozenArbiter.
But the new player that play his first games doesn't care that your smurf will reach its true skill level after 10-20 games. What he cares about is that he got completely raped when he tried to play a multiplayer game.
|
On March 20 2009 08:17 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 08:09 Spawkuring wrote:On March 20 2009 08:05 FrozenArbiter wrote:
No they'll simply play UMS or buy it for the campaign. If someone can't handle getting stomped once every 20 games (seriously, smurfing progamers are going to stay low rank HOW LONG? not very long at all indeed), they are the kind of whiny bitch that will quit anyway.
Call me elitist if you want, but convenience > the sensibilites of whiny kids. Going by that logic, I could easily say that pro-gamers who want to take a break can just play UMS instead, and that making a smurf account is completely unnecessary. But of course that isn't the case is it? Pros obviously want to make smurfs for their own reasons, and those reasons happen to put casuals at a disadvantage for enjoying the game. Like I said before, ladder should be open to both pros and casuals alike. Casuals shouldn't be locked out just because a pro wants to "crush noobs" to relax. Your enjoyment is no more important than anyone elses. .. You don't smurf to crush noobs, you smurf so that people won't know that it's you. So that you can try out things without people knowing it's you. Essentially, so that you can have some privacy if you are known in the community. I wasn't super well-known when I played seriously, but I'm sure if you asked anyone with a ToT tag if the people begging for games was annoying, you'd get a resounding YES. The progamer is OBVIOUSLY not going to stay at a low rank on his smurf account, since he'll be winning every game at the lower ranks -_- The way you talk about it, it's like you think every good player would be constantly resetting to noob-bash their way to 15-0 and starting over again -_- No, not at all - that's sandbagging. It simply means playing on a different ID. I played 500 games on PGTour season on the ID Jinro. That was me smurfing, as the IDs I was known under were Dream.t)PltO and FrozenArbiter.
Well in that case I have no problem with smurfing just to conceal your name. That's why I at least support having "secondary" accounts to allow it to some extent.
The problem here is that despite how much you may try to downplay it, a LOT of people smurf just to crush noobs over and over and over again. That's the problem that needs to be solved. Sandbagging, smurfing, whatever it's called, it's needs to be addressed in some way. It shouldn't be removed entirely since smurfing has its benefits, but it also can't be allowed absolute free reign. Catering to casuals and hardcores is what Blizzard is all about. "Cater to pros at all costs no matter how many casuals get caught in the crossfire" is not a philsophy that Blizzard operates by.
|
On March 20 2009 08:23 naventus wrote:
You will probably have unlimited names, but your stats will be linked, though invisible, across all names.
What this means is that each name has their own stats, but for the purposes of matchmaking, the matchmaker will be using your universal aggregated stats (which are hidden).
Yeah, I mentioned that before. I'm not too sure if Blizzard will do that though due to the fact it really doesn't fit in with their one unique online ID philosophy.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On March 20 2009 08:24 Eury wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 08:17 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 08:09 Spawkuring wrote:On March 20 2009 08:05 FrozenArbiter wrote:
No they'll simply play UMS or buy it for the campaign. If someone can't handle getting stomped once every 20 games (seriously, smurfing progamers are going to stay low rank HOW LONG? not very long at all indeed), they are the kind of whiny bitch that will quit anyway.
Call me elitist if you want, but convenience > the sensibilites of whiny kids. Going by that logic, I could easily say that pro-gamers who want to take a break can just play UMS instead, and that making a smurf account is completely unnecessary. But of course that isn't the case is it? Pros obviously want to make smurfs for their own reasons, and those reasons happen to put casuals at a disadvantage for enjoying the game. Like I said before, ladder should be open to both pros and casuals alike. Casuals shouldn't be locked out just because a pro wants to "crush noobs" to relax. Your enjoyment is no more important than anyone elses. .. You don't smurf to crush noobs, you smurf so that people won't know that it's you. So that you can try out things without people knowing it's you. Essentially, so that you can have some privacy if you are known in the community. I wasn't super well-known when I played seriously, but I'm sure if you asked anyone with a ToT tag if the people begging for games was annoying, you'd get a resounding YES. The progamer is OBVIOUSLY not going to stay at a low rank on his smurf account, since he'll be winning every game at the lower ranks -_- The way you talk about it, it's like you think every good player would be constantly resetting to noob-bash their way to 15-0 and starting over again -_- No, not at all - that's sandbagging. It simply means playing on a different ID. I played 500 games on PGTour season on the ID Jinro. That was me smurfing, as the IDs I was known under were Dream.t)PltO and FrozenArbiter. But the new player that play his first games doesn't care that your smurf will reach its true skill level after 10-20 games. What he cares about is that he got completely raped when he tried to play a multiplayer game.
That is completely unavoidable tho.. If you want to win right from the get go, uh, don't play RTS games? I dunno, I can never really emphasize in these topics - I LOVE losing, probably more than winning. Losing 10 games in a row only makes me want to play more, and there's seriously no limit on this.
When I started playing BW in 2002 it took me at least 2-300 games before I had more wins than losses - possibly a lot more (I was 13), but I loved it.
On March 20 2009 08:26 Spawkuring wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 08:17 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 08:09 Spawkuring wrote:On March 20 2009 08:05 FrozenArbiter wrote:
No they'll simply play UMS or buy it for the campaign. If someone can't handle getting stomped once every 20 games (seriously, smurfing progamers are going to stay low rank HOW LONG? not very long at all indeed), they are the kind of whiny bitch that will quit anyway.
Call me elitist if you want, but convenience > the sensibilites of whiny kids. Going by that logic, I could easily say that pro-gamers who want to take a break can just play UMS instead, and that making a smurf account is completely unnecessary. But of course that isn't the case is it? Pros obviously want to make smurfs for their own reasons, and those reasons happen to put casuals at a disadvantage for enjoying the game. Like I said before, ladder should be open to both pros and casuals alike. Casuals shouldn't be locked out just because a pro wants to "crush noobs" to relax. Your enjoyment is no more important than anyone elses. .. You don't smurf to crush noobs, you smurf so that people won't know that it's you. So that you can try out things without people knowing it's you. Essentially, so that you can have some privacy if you are known in the community. I wasn't super well-known when I played seriously, but I'm sure if you asked anyone with a ToT tag if the people begging for games was annoying, you'd get a resounding YES. The progamer is OBVIOUSLY not going to stay at a low rank on his smurf account, since he'll be winning every game at the lower ranks -_- The way you talk about it, it's like you think every good player would be constantly resetting to noob-bash their way to 15-0 and starting over again -_- No, not at all - that's sandbagging. It simply means playing on a different ID. I played 500 games on PGTour season on the ID Jinro. That was me smurfing, as the IDs I was known under were Dream.t)PltO and FrozenArbiter. Well in that case I have no problem with smurfing just to conceal your name. That's why I at least support having "secondary" accounts to allow it to some extent. The problem here is that despite how much you may try to downplay it, a LOT of people smurf just to crush noobs over and over and over again. That's the problem that needs to be solved. Sandbagging, smurfing, whatever it's called, it's needs to be addressed in some way. It shouldn't be removed entirely since smurfing has its benefits, but it also can't be allowed absolute free reign. Catering to casuals and hardcores is what Blizzard is all about. "Cater to pros at all costs no matter how many casuals get caught in the crossfire" is not a philsophy that Blizzard operates by.
Ok now we can agree with eachother - people that do that are complete idiots. A fine way to solve it would be to allow, say, 3 IDs per master account (one per race !). If you want to create a new one after your 3rd, you have to delete an old one.
|
Yeah, if someone gets raped and puts down the game, that is not blizzard's fault. It's the fault of that quitter. My first 100 games on Bnet were me being raped. It made me excited to be that good so it made me play more.
If these ultra-sensitive casual gamers don't want to lose, or if they do lose, freak out and uninstall, then they shouldn't ladder.
|
On March 20 2009 08:18 404.Nintu wrote:
Also, Blizzard will almost DEFINITELY have a more sophisticated matching system. Unlike iccup, where your points are your only defining skill measure in a lobby, SC2 matching will probably take into consideration w:l ratio. A progamer going 6-0 against players who themselves are 6-2 or so, will certainly have a different impact on the matches. So that progamer will be out of your league in a matter of a few games, instead of lingering in the d/c- area for 20-25 games.
Some relevance might be made with the current wow arena elo system ;
You basicly have an actual (visual) ELO and a hidden ELO, but only your hidden will determine your opponents.
How it works is like this, if you get let's say B- rank, while winning and losing ~100 points a game. You decide to create a new username under the same account, instead of beeing matched agains D opponents, you'll immideatly face B- - C+ opponents, giving each win reward you a greater amount of points (+400), while a loss would only minorly punish you, taking your actual rank into account (-25).
What this enables you to is create a new AKA, while still playing good opponents.
No one has to panic, for beeing faced with B- opponents for that matter when offracing, because I'm quite sure only the rank will be counted for the race itself.
@ Frozenarbiter ; I'm quite certain blizzard intends that you do not share your account even amongst family members. Then again, they are not going to prevent your brothers, sisters or uncle to play on the computer with your ID. You are in the end responsible for your own account. As far as UMS and custom practice games or SP, there is no problem anyone else using your account in the family to just have some fun is there? If they would like to play by themself on the ladder, one could only assume that a copy of starcraft themself is advised.
Think why some people are freaking out, is that just how SC is recording every game you played (vs comp etc) in your public profile, this is highly doubtable to be the case for SC II.
|
On March 20 2009 08:30 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 08:24 Eury wrote:On March 20 2009 08:17 FrozenArbiter wrote:On March 20 2009 08:09 Spawkuring wrote:On March 20 2009 08:05 FrozenArbiter wrote:
No they'll simply play UMS or buy it for the campaign. If someone can't handle getting stomped once every 20 games (seriously, smurfing progamers are going to stay low rank HOW LONG? not very long at all indeed), they are the kind of whiny bitch that will quit anyway.
Call me elitist if you want, but convenience > the sensibilites of whiny kids. Going by that logic, I could easily say that pro-gamers who want to take a break can just play UMS instead, and that making a smurf account is completely unnecessary. But of course that isn't the case is it? Pros obviously want to make smurfs for their own reasons, and those reasons happen to put casuals at a disadvantage for enjoying the game. Like I said before, ladder should be open to both pros and casuals alike. Casuals shouldn't be locked out just because a pro wants to "crush noobs" to relax. Your enjoyment is no more important than anyone elses. .. You don't smurf to crush noobs, you smurf so that people won't know that it's you. So that you can try out things without people knowing it's you. Essentially, so that you can have some privacy if you are known in the community. I wasn't super well-known when I played seriously, but I'm sure if you asked anyone with a ToT tag if the people begging for games was annoying, you'd get a resounding YES. The progamer is OBVIOUSLY not going to stay at a low rank on his smurf account, since he'll be winning every game at the lower ranks -_- The way you talk about it, it's like you think every good player would be constantly resetting to noob-bash their way to 15-0 and starting over again -_- No, not at all - that's sandbagging. It simply means playing on a different ID. I played 500 games on PGTour season on the ID Jinro. That was me smurfing, as the IDs I was known under were Dream.t)PltO and FrozenArbiter. But the new player that play his first games doesn't care that your smurf will reach its true skill level after 10-20 games. What he cares about is that he got completely raped when he tried to play a multiplayer game. That is completely unavoidable tho.. If you want to win right from the get go, uh, don't play RTS games? I dunno, I can never really emphasize in these topics - I LOVE losing, probably more than winning. Losing 10 games in a row only makes me want to play more, and there's seriously no limit on this. When I started playing BW in 2002 it took me at least 2-300 games before I had more wins than losses - possibly a lot more (I was 13), but I loved it.
Yes, you describe the high threshold that have plagued previous games, but I think Blizzard wants to change that. I for one applaud that, and it will gain e-sports too. Anything that attracts more players to competitive playing is a good thing in my book.
|
A fine way to solve it would be to allow, say, 3 IDs per master account (one per race !). If you want to create a new one after your 3rd, you have to delete an old one.
I like this idea. Because having only 3 would suck because after a certain time, your friends will know your account and sometimes you wanna play without practice partner obligations or friends wanting to watch replays. So being able to delete an old smurf to create a new one is a nice idea.
|
Definitely signed up!
EDIT: Wow, if you have a valid CD key, you can set it up so you can DL the game when you lose the stuff.
|
On March 20 2009 08:05 FrozenArbiter wrote:Ok now we can agree with eachother - people that do that are complete idiots. A fine way to solve it would be to allow, say, 3 IDs per master account (one per race !). If you want to create a new one after your 3rd, you have to delete an old one.
That wouldn't solve anything, if you can just delete an account to make a new one then theres no purpose in having a limit at all.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Sigh then make it so you can delete it after X time has passed.
|
|
|
|
|
FUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK
I wish I was you so bad. Oh my god.
|
In addition to that, I'm sitting on my blizzcon 08 beta key. What to do with my extra key?
|
I would pretty much do anything for a beta key right about now, but if I had a extra key I'd just sell it on ebay/give it to a friend
|
do I have to merge the games, fuck that shit my friends keys and mine are all mixed up.
|
Oh my god, I am so pumped. Now all I can do is hope that I get a Beta key
|
On March 20 2009 09:01 rOlEx wrote:
In addition to that, I'm sitting on my blizzcon 08 beta key. What to do with my extra key?
give it to your good friend anotak ^_^ ! ! ! ! ! !
|
T_T
Registered all fine. Now I have a problem of not knowing where my CD's/Keys are Haven't used them in years... And I have every single legit Blizzard game out there (including WoW).
|
Well I've had a Blizzard account for some time, which got upgraded to the Battle.net account. I'm pretty sure (and have had someone else agree) that the beta opt-in was always available to the Blizzard account, so let's not expect the beta to start next week or anything! I'm saying May though.
|
United States12235 Posts
On March 20 2009 08:16 Daniri wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 07:24 Excalibur_Z wrote:
I can tell you why. They tried a beta test of the unified account system (which were called Blizzard Accounts) during the F&F alpha of WotLK. It was an abysmal and utter failure, with the account creation system constantly being down, people getting stuck because they created an account but didn't get a password emailed to them, passwords not being saved by the system, etc. It was horrible and required a lot of intervention by Blizzard customer service reps and account managers. Technical problems with an alpha system in a alpha is making you uncomfortable?
I understand that they were just beginning to implement the features and account system, but those same problems are already popping up in the here and now, particularly with regards to server stability. Anytime Blizzard releases a new online feature or system, it's going to get hammered by millions of people and the load will be unsustainable. We're just seeing even more of that now =] And because I personally experienced some of those problems, I can sympathize completely.
|
fuck, no beta for my 2 accounts...
|
Apparently the jpegs floating around of the beta invitations are fake. A relatively poor photoshop job if you look closely. http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=15864296405&sid=3000
Besides, where would that link go? If someone really wanted to prove it, they'd show the page that the link leads to with blanked out information.
|
It better be fake, no invite for me.
|
Awesome stuff it's really nice to have all my games and cdkey linked to one account and I love the fact that I can download the games straight from Blizzard if I happen to lose my CD's or they get damaged.
|
It's fake. The picture looks like a poor photoshop job and Blizzard would have announced if invites were going out.
|
On March 20 2009 05:31 Meth wrote:
I signed up, I hope I'm a lucky one who will receive a Beta Key before you guys!
I wouldn't get your hopes up
They've had that beta opt-in option in the blizzard account profile options forever... I've had it enabled in my account for a long time...
|
Hopefully they will make it so that your master account decides your AMM rating and then you can change your visible ID at any time or add new IDs with the same rating. That way you can smurf but do it at around your own level. Another thing they could do is that they have "levels" so that when you reach a certain level on one of your IDs your new IDs gets upgraded to that level. As an example an A+ player might get AMM rating set to the level of a B player on his new IDs. He would then be able to smurf against a lower level player but still not ruin the gameplay for a totally new player.
The problem with starcraft 1 is that new players are discouraged to play the game and improve because the noobstomping mentality is so big and people actively play opponents that are lower level just to win and because they can. They create "noob games" even though they are not noobs themselves and thus new players have no way to play vs each other. Granted these scrubs are most likely bordering D in terms of skill but they are still easily able to stomp totally new players. I've tried to get friends to play starcraft 1 with me but the way the game works right now it's not possible for them to improve unless I actively coach them and they have an urge to become better.
The thinking behind the AMM system adresses this problem and anyone that argues against it should really take a break from starcraft and check out some modern games. Matchmaking and different levels of play are worked out well in many new games and there's no reason for believing that blizzard will fail to make a system that works well for both competetive and casual players.
|
lol, I thought it was real shit.
|
is awesome32274 Posts
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
|
|
|
On March 20 2009 11:14 naventus wrote:Is this guy lying?
Yes.
|
On March 20 2009 11:13 IntoTheWow wrote:
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
great name for a kid
(mad props if you get it)
|
unfortunately guys, this blizz account beta opt-in has been available since last blizzcon.. so its not totally new.. Altho the remake of battle.net is a great sign.
|
This is convent because you can download your games after you give your cd key it becomes listed in your management account.
|
Guys, Blizzard would have made an official announcement as to whether the Beta had began or not. How can you fall for such a bad trick?
|
On March 20 2009 12:41 rushz0rz wrote:
Guys, Blizzard would have made an official announcement as to whether the Beta had began or not. How can you fall for such a bad trick?
Nobody thought the beta started. People thought keys were being given out. (much like blizzcon)
How can you fall for not reading the thread?
|
Hopefully the more games you have registered the more likely you are to get a beta key, so the people who are actively supporting blizzard are more likely to be picked (rewarded)
|
On March 20 2009 12:54 404.Nintu wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 12:41 rushz0rz wrote:
Guys, Blizzard would have made an official announcement as to whether the Beta had began or not. How can you fall for such a bad trick? Nobody thought the beta started. People thought keys were being given out. (much like blizzcon) How can you fall for not reading the thread?
I meant both, what difference does it ultimately make? None.
Don't be a jackass.
|
Thats what I'm hoping for nataziel.
|
On January 12 2008 17:33 Seraphim wrote:NO, FUCK YOU LOL
|
On March 20 2009 12:57 thewalkindude wrote:
Thats what I'm hoping for nataziel.
Heh, I've lost my WC3 key though, priority should be given to people who've already registered sc/bw/sc battlechest/sc anthology for sure.
|
On March 20 2009 13:05 MoRe_mInErAls wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2008 17:33 Seraphim wrote:On January 12 2008 17:31 rushz0rz wrote:
fuck you savior NO, FUCK YOU LOL
LOL WHAT????
|
I came across this as I was making my account.
Force Majeure. Blizzard shall not be liable for any delay or failure to perform resulting from causes outside the reasonable control of Blizzard, including without limitation any failure to perform hereunder due to unforeseen circumstances or cause beyond Blizzard's control such as acts of God, war, terrorism, riots, embargoes, acts of civil or military authorities, fire, floods, accidents, strikes, or shortages of transportation facilities, fuel, energy, labor or materials.
Blizzard isn't accountable for acts of God?
|
On March 20 2009 13:55 Ellis wrote:I came across this as I was making my account. Show nested quote +Force Majeure. Blizzard shall not be liable for any delay or failure to perform resulting from causes outside the reasonable control of Blizzard, including without limitation any failure to perform hereunder due to unforeseen circumstances or cause beyond Blizzard's control such as acts of God, war, terrorism, riots, embargoes, acts of civil or military authorities, fire, floods, accidents, strikes, or shortages of transportation facilities, fuel, energy, labor or materials. Blizzard isn't accountable for acts of God?
thats pretty commonly used legal wording
|
On March 20 2009 11:26 SearingShadow wrote:Yes.
Then why is he not banned yet? We shouldn't tolerate shit like this here.
|
On March 20 2009 11:40 Archerofaiur wrote:great name for a kid (mad props if you get it)
Louis CK rocks!
Also, I'm not lying. Sorry to hear none of you have received invites yet but they clearly just started so have patience! Also: I have 2 SC2 beta keys! Neener-neener-neener!
|
You have 2 keys and got invited? Give away your keys then, since you don't need them.
|
|
|
Darn, we can't add W2 or D1 keys to our Battle.net account.
|
On March 20 2009 15:05 prOxi.swAMi wrote:
Stop falling for it...
but we wants it!
|
Also I want to clarify something. This "opt-in" checkbox has been there since Blizzard added the Blizzard account feature (months back). This thread, like the other recent few in the SC2 forum, is just full of shit.
|
konadora
Singapore66158 Posts
|
On March 20 2009 15:05 prOxi.swAMi wrote:
Stop falling for it...
I didn't actually believe him, I was just trolling him
|
Must go add all blizzard games to account in vague hope of increasing chance for Beta!
|
Sorry of this has already been asked - but does it matter whether I sign up on US or EU? Can I sign up on both?
Thanks
|
Germany2896 Posts
I for one really dislike that system, at least if blizzard does not guarantee the following:
* A ban for whatever reason only affects the one DisplayID+CDKey you have been using and not the whole blizzard account.
* You are able to remove a CD-Key from your Blizzard-Acc and transfer it to another
* Other players can't find out your blizzard-acc or if two bnet-ids belong to the same blizz-acc
* You can protect individual IDs with a PW, so your brother whom you let play SC2 a bit on your cdkey cannot use your IDs.
* Important Actions (CD-Key related and id management) require a master pw or possibly email confirmation.
And their TOS are getting more restrictive every revision too -_-
|
Looks great cant wait for whats going to happen ^_^
|
seems good....
but at the same time... it seems like an iron clad way of making sure only 1 person owns a specific cd key...
i mean i share my wc3 cd key w/ my friend cus we live half the world from each other but this... iono...
if they wanted they could totally restrict ur cd key from being palyed by any1 else
and if u type up the address correctly they could go in for some serious legal issues
|
On March 20 2009 18:24 MasterOfChaos wrote:
I for one really dislike that system, at least if blizzard does not guarantee the following:
* A ban for whatever reason only affects the one DisplayID+CDKey you have been using and not the whole blizzard account.
I really hope that a ban affects your entire account and every associated account for as long as possible! STOP HACKING!
|
United States12235 Posts
On March 20 2009 18:24 MasterOfChaos wrote:
I for one really dislike that system, at least if blizzard does not guarantee the following:
* A ban for whatever reason only affects the one DisplayID+CDKey you have been using and not the whole blizzard account.
* Other players can't find out your blizzard-acc or if two bnet-ids belong to the same blizz-acc
The former wouldn't really make sense, I think. If you are caught hacking in War3, there should be no reason why Blizzard would prevent you from playing Starcraft or WoW. That punishment would be completely over the top, in my opinion.
As for the latter, I think it would be pretty convenient to have a Battle.net Account Friends List that covered all games. That way, you would be able to choose who gets to know about new accounts when you make them. Of course, it shouldn't apply to any and all players, only your mutual friends included on your Battle.net Account Friends List.
|
You guys are making some pretty wild assumptions about this. It's primarily to consolidate your games to stop the sale of accounts and things like that in WoW and their future games. It also prevents resale in the form of used games etc, because companies see this as a threat to their profits. Much like Steam you won't be able to take a game off your account
No one will ever know your bnet account name unless you tell them. Just like with your wow account. You will likely create actual SC2 display names similar to the way you've always created Bnet game accounts, they will have no connection to your bnet account that others can see.
Picture it like the relationship between wow account and wow characters. No one can see what account the characters were created on etc.
It doesn't really change anything, its just blizzard getting on board the natural progression of software moving from physical ownership to licensed ownership basically
|
On March 21 2009 01:41 floor exercise wrote:
It doesn't really change anything, its just blizzard getting on board the natural progression of software moving from physical ownership to licensed ownership basically
This is a really insightful point. Of course free software people must really hate this idea, but it's really the movement from product->service.
We are no longer paying to have a physical copy of the software they wrote - instead, we are paying for the ability to use their software and their services. It's a been a subtle shift, but probably will continue as developers rethink how their products are being used.
|
On March 20 2009 22:59 rOlEx wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 18:24 MasterOfChaos wrote:
I for one really dislike that system, at least if blizzard does not guarantee the following:
* A ban for whatever reason only affects the one DisplayID+CDKey you have been using and not the whole blizzard account.
I really hope that a ban affects your entire account and every associated account for as long as possible! STOP HACKING!
MOC i will take these
rofl
u guys do realize that the programs that most likely both of u run (chaos launcher) and any subsequent programs, non-blizzard made, hereafter that is an attachment to the games made by people like MOC is considered "Hacking" rite?
Also a ban on the CD key does not have to mean that u hacked.
IF u violate ANY of blizzard games' terms and use then they have the right to ban u from bnet for it...
can u guys seriously say that you never broke any of their terms of service? no rite?
getting banned on all accnts or w.e for breaking terms and service is the equivalent of getting ur driving license evoked forever for going over 60 mph on the highway...
EDIT: oops sry for the mistakes edited
|
they can actually bring you to a trial for breaking their ToS
No, the ToS is not a legal contract.
They can ban you. They can't sue you. And the Blizzard private servers sue thing a while ago... it goes beyond the simple ToS, it's a legal copyright issue or something like that.
|
blizzard is saying AYBABTU
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On March 21 2009 03:35 R3condite wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 22:59 rOlEx wrote:On March 20 2009 18:24 MasterOfChaos wrote:
I for one really dislike that system, at least if blizzard does not guarantee the following:
* A ban for whatever reason only affects the one DisplayID+CDKey you have been using and not the whole blizzard account.
I really hope that a ban affects your entire account and every associated account for as long as possible! STOP HACKING! Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 23:57 Excalibur_Z wrote:On March 20 2009 18:24 MasterOfChaos wrote:
I for one really dislike that system, at least if blizzard does not guarantee the following:
* A ban for whatever reason only affects the one DisplayID+CDKey you have been using and not the whole blizzard account.
* Other players can't find out your blizzard-acc or if two bnet-ids belong to the same blizz-acc
The former wouldn't really make sense, I think. If you are caught hacking in War3, there should be no reason why Blizzard would prevent you from playing Starcraft or WoW. That punishment would be completely over the top, in my opinion. MOC i will take these rofl u guys do realize that the programs that most likely both of u run (chaos launcher) and any subsequent programs, non-blizzard made, hereafter that is an attachment to the games made by people like MOC is considered "Hacking" rite? Also a ban on the CD key does not have to mean that u hacked. IF u violate ANY of blizzard games' terms and use then they have the right to ban u from bnet for it... can u guys seriously say that you never broke any of their terms of service? no rite? getting banned on all accnts or w.e for breaking terms and service is the equivalent of getting ur driving license evoked forever for going over 60 mph on the highway... EDIT: they can actually bring you to a trial for breaking their ToS
Re-read Excal's post.. He's saying it WOULD NOT make sense to ban all your cd-keys for an infringement on one of them.
|
There a few things in the new game management that are annoying imo..
First, you have to choose a language for the game, but later on you are fixed into the language you chose...
Second, some cool stuff isn't ready to download, like WC2 and D1, and the Linux version of SC... I mean, you can even download the Mac version, whats about with the Linux one?
Quite sad to me, but in the other hand they still build it up at the moment.
|
I disagree with only banning a single cd key, and not the entire account.
Pretty much every Blizzard game. except WoW as far as I know, becomes overrun by hacks. D2 is fueled by hacks and bots, maphacking in War3 and SC:BW has always and will always be a problem. If people have universal accounts they actually care about, then it will actually deter them from hacking out of fear from "losing it all."
What happens when someone is currently banned in let's say d2? They spend $5 and get a new cd key and start botting again...
I think it should be like this:
First offense: 1 week ban from the game, warning issued.
Second offense: 1 month ban on all games, HACKER label applied to account for all to see
Third offense: You can no longer play games online, all stats are wiped. WoW account is removed. All your keys become voided for multiplayer and cannot be transferred.
I've never heard of someone getting banned for using a 3rd party program that wasn't specifically a hack aside from people in WoW using macros.
|
On March 21 2009 08:06 PokePill wrote:
I think it should be like this:
First offense: 1 week ban from the game, warning issued.
Second offense: 1 month ban on all games, HACKER label applied to account for all to see
Third offense: You can no longer play games online, all stats are wiped. WoW account is removed. All your keys become voided for multiplayer and cannot be transferred.
I've got a better system.
First offense: You can no longer play games online, all stats are wiped. WoW account is removed. All your keys become voided for multiplayer and cannot be transferred.
Second offense: A group of hairy burly men invade your home and rape you.
Third offense: Pictures of said rape are posted on the blizzard website in a weekly featurette.
|
On March 21 2009 08:28 Cpt.Cocaine wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2009 08:06 PokePill wrote:
I think it should be like this:
First offense: 1 week ban from the game, warning issued.
Second offense: 1 month ban on all games, HACKER label applied to account for all to see
Third offense: You can no longer play games online, all stats are wiped. WoW account is removed. All your keys become voided for multiplayer and cannot be transferred.
I've got a better system. First offense: You can no longer play games online, all stats are wiped. WoW account is removed. All your keys become voided for multiplayer and cannot be transferred. Second offense: A group of hairy burly men invade your home and rape you. Third offense: Pictures of said rape are posted on the blizzard website in a weekly featurette.
... a little to lenient... but i guess we dont want people to flare up at nothing...
|
United States12235 Posts
On March 21 2009 07:51 AdunToridas wrote:
There a few things in the new game management that are annoying imo..
First, you have to choose a language for the game, but later on you are fixed into the language you chose...
Second, some cool stuff isn't ready to download, like WC2 and D1, and the Linux version of SC... I mean, you can even download the Mac version, whats about with the Linux one?
Quite sad to me, but in the other hand they still build it up at the moment.
Is there even an official Linux version? I don't believe I've ever heard of that.
Diablo1 may never be downloadable (who knows though) because it didn't have a CD-Key, and neither did War2 from what I remember. Is War2BNE downloadable? I don't have a version to check.
|
When you add games there's a list of what's supported. I don't think War2BNE was in there.
|
I already like it better than Steam. Thank you Blizz!
|
|
|
ahhh.. to bad...
but we know they will go out
|
I opted in for the beta, I hope they pick me. Just incase I added all my blizzard games I own (which is pretty much all of them). I hope it helps my odds in getting selected for the beta.
The one nice thing is now I can download SC again. My cat destroyed my Starcraft CD, True story! I had this big heavy glass jar full of change, cat knocked it over with my SC CD (and cats are suppose to not be clumsy), somehow my CD ended up on the bottom of this pile of broken glass and change with this nice crack in the CD .
|
On March 21 2009 08:06 PokePill wrote:
I disagree with only banning a single cd key, and not the entire account.
Pretty much every Blizzard game. except WoW as far as I know, becomes overrun by hacks. D2 is fueled by hacks and bots, maphacking in War3 and SC:BW has always and will always be a problem. If people have universal accounts they actually care about, then it will actually deter them from hacking out of fear from "losing it all."
What happens when someone is currently banned in let's say d2? They spend $5 and get a new cd key and start botting again...
I think it should be like this:
First offense: 1 week ban from the game, warning issued.
Second offense: 1 month ban on all games, HACKER label applied to account for all to see
Third offense: You can no longer play games online, all stats are wiped. WoW account is removed. All your keys become voided for multiplayer and cannot be transferred.
I've never heard of someone getting banned for using a 3rd party program that wasn't specifically a hack aside from people in WoW using macros.
um what do you think makes the company more money?
1. Someone rebuying the game to play again with the new CD key and continuing to pay monthly wow payments.
or
2. Someone saying, "fuck blizzard! I can't play any of my games anymore, time to go play Halo or something."
|
On March 21 2009 08:48 Excalibur_Z wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2009 07:51 AdunToridas wrote:
There a few things in the new game management that are annoying imo..
First, you have to choose a language for the game, but later on you are fixed into the language you chose...
Second, some cool stuff isn't ready to download, like WC2 and D1, and the Linux version of SC... I mean, you can even download the Mac version, whats about with the Linux one?
Quite sad to me, but in the other hand they still build it up at the moment. Is there even an official Linux version? I don't believe I've ever heard of that. Diablo1 may never be downloadable (who knows though) because it didn't have a CD-Key, and neither did War2 from what I remember. Is War2BNE downloadable? I don't have a version to check.
you can easily download diablo 1 and warcraft 2 for free from sources other than blizzard
|
+ Show Spoiler +On March 21 2009 12:21 lowlypawn wrote:I opted in for the beta, I hope they pick me. Just incase I added all my blizzard games I own (which is pretty much all of them). I hope it helps my odds in getting selected for the beta. The one nice thing is now I can download SC again. My cat destroyed my Starcraft CD, True story! I had this big heavy glass jar full of change, cat knocked it over with my SC CD (and cats are suppose to not be clumsy), somehow my CD ended up on the bottom of this pile of broken glass and change with this nice crack in the CD .
|
i rekon blizzard should pick those who have played black thorne and the lost vikings...those games are sex
|
United States12235 Posts
On March 21 2009 13:20 Elite00fm wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2009 08:48 Excalibur_Z wrote:On March 21 2009 07:51 AdunToridas wrote:
There a few things in the new game management that are annoying imo..
First, you have to choose a language for the game, but later on you are fixed into the language you chose...
Second, some cool stuff isn't ready to download, like WC2 and D1, and the Linux version of SC... I mean, you can even download the Mac version, whats about with the Linux one?
Quite sad to me, but in the other hand they still build it up at the moment. Is there even an official Linux version? I don't believe I've ever heard of that. Diablo1 may never be downloadable (who knows though) because it didn't have a CD-Key, and neither did War2 from what I remember. Is War2BNE downloadable? I don't have a version to check. you can easily download diablo 1 and warcraft 2 for free from sources other than blizzard
Not only is this off-topic, it's a gigantic :rolleyes:
|
People on the Bnet forums are freaking out over the beta keys. Apparently BlizzCon goers can now confirm their beta keys through e-mail. Can anyone here test this out?
|
On March 21 2009 16:17 Spawkuring wrote:
People on the Bnet forums are freaking out over the beta keys. Apparently BlizzCon goers can now confirm their beta keys through e-mail. Can anyone here test this out? I was just reading the same thing. Someone with a key check http://www.blizzcon.com/beta please
|
|
|
On March 21 2009 16:17 Spawkuring wrote:
People on the Bnet forums are freaking out over the beta keys. Apparently BlizzCon goers can now confirm their beta keys through e-mail. Can anyone here test this out?
yah... umm...
ill give you the email address to "validate" your beta key...
just PM me
|
I entered my BlizzCon beta key on the website and it worked
|
Yes, just tried this out. Worked. Though the email you get is pretty shittily written:
This eMail is to confirm the address entered for the Blizzard Future Beta Sign-Up.
When the chosen beta test begins in the future, we will eMail this address with further instructions. Please keep this eMail active and make sure to check back -- you never know when your invitation will appear!
Thank you for your interest in testing our games -- we hope to see you soon!
Here is your signup information:
|
aers
United States1210 Posts
I don't understand why everyone is making a big deal over the beta opt-in; it's seriously been there since we were first asked to make Blizzard accounts on day 1 of the WoW: WoTLK beta. In fact, the ability to register games + download them has been there too..
Blizz doesn't send out opt-in keys prior to the beta starting, from past experience. For example, the first few days of the WoTLK beta was just us who were lucky to get keys from other sources + F&F Alpha people. They didn't start sending out waves of opt-in invites for some time.
tl;dr stop freaking out over this & see you in SC2 beta... :D
|
So I guess I should get off my lazy arse and find all my Blizzard cd-keys (which is all of them), for the slight off-chance that having them all registered helps with the beta selections...
e: can't merge EU WoW accounts yet.. balls
|
On March 21 2009 20:23 aers wrote:
I don't understand why everyone is making a big deal over the beta opt-in; it's seriously been there since we were first asked to make Blizzard accounts on day 1 of the WoW: WoTLK beta. In fact, the ability to register games + download them has been there too..
Blizz doesn't send out opt-in keys prior to the beta starting, from past experience. For example, the first few days of the WoTLK beta was just us who were lucky to get keys from other sources + F&F Alpha people. They didn't start sending out waves of opt-in invites for some time.
tl;dr stop freaking out over this & see you in SC2 beta... :D
Yeah but blizzard is accepting blizzcon beta key submissions now.
|
On March 21 2009 08:48 Excalibur_Z wrote:
Is there even an official Linux version? I don't believe I've ever heard of that. ... mh well at least I thought so...
On March 21 2009 08:48 Excalibur_Z wrote:
Diablo1 may never be downloadable (who knows though) because it didn't have a CD-Key, and neither did War2 from what I remember. Is War2BNE downloadable? I don't have a version to check. Well WC2 had a key, especially the BNE. So I thought they should add that. But the most annoying point imo is that you can't switch between the language of your games..
|
Wow for a new account I have to give them my full address and phone number? For what? So they can call me when I cheated? Or send someone to beat me up when I hacked? I don't like this direction.
|
On March 23 2009 02:40 Neroin wrote:
Wow for a new account I have to give them my full address and phone number? For what? So they can call me when I cheated? Or send someone to beat me up when I hacked? I don't like this direction.
Hey, at least hackers will be brutally beaten by Blizzard Hacker Removal staff. Physical violence is always the way to go.
|
thanks for this.. awesomeness
|
On March 23 2009 02:40 Neroin wrote:
Wow for a new account I have to give them my full address and phone number? For what? So they can call me when I cheated? Or send someone to beat me up when I hacked? I don't like this direction.
I like these ideas. And people who make hacks can have their location made known for an air strike and/or an egging.
Seriously, does it matter? You're not important enough for Blizzard to call you, don't worry.
|
On March 23 2009 15:41 FaZ- wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2009 02:40 Neroin wrote:
Wow for a new account I have to give them my full address and phone number? For what? So they can call me when I cheated? Or send someone to beat me up when I hacked? I don't like this direction. I like these ideas. And people who make hacks can have their location made known for an air strike and/or an egging. Seriously, does it matter? You're not important enough for Blizzard to call you, don't worry.
I used to think that way too. But when I signed up for this account and had to agree to blizzard being allowed to record and view all my chat messages it just made me feel uneasy. And when you read about Warden in WoW you start to realise that blizzard doesn't give a crap about your privacy and/or integrity.
I'd be surprised if they don't continue this trend with SC2. Somewhere boundaries need to be established.
These small things don't bother me very much, but combined, they're unsettling.
|
On March 23 2009 17:12 ParasitJonte wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2009 15:41 FaZ- wrote:On March 23 2009 02:40 Neroin wrote:
Wow for a new account I have to give them my full address and phone number? For what? So they can call me when I cheated? Or send someone to beat me up when I hacked? I don't like this direction. I like these ideas. And people who make hacks can have their location made known for an air strike and/or an egging. Seriously, does it matter? You're not important enough for Blizzard to call you, don't worry. I used to think that way too. But when I signed up for this account and had to agree to blizzard being allowed to record and view all my chat messages it just made me feel uneasy. And when you read about Warden in WoW you start to realise that blizzard doesn't give a crap about your privacy and/or integrity. I'd be surprised if they don't continue this trend with SC2. Somewhere boundaries need to be established. These small things don't bother me very much, but combined, they're unsettling.
I highly doubt they read or even save your chat messages.
|
|
|
On March 23 2009 17:12 ParasitJonte wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2009 15:41 FaZ- wrote:On March 23 2009 02:40 Neroin wrote:
Wow for a new account I have to give them my full address and phone number? For what? So they can call me when I cheated? Or send someone to beat me up when I hacked? I don't like this direction. I like these ideas. And people who make hacks can have their location made known for an air strike and/or an egging. Seriously, does it matter? You're not important enough for Blizzard to call you, don't worry. I used to think that way too. But when I signed up for this account and had to agree to blizzard being allowed to record and view all my chat messages it just made me feel uneasy. And when you read about Warden in WoW you start to realise that blizzard doesn't give a crap about your privacy and/or integrity. I'd be surprised if they don't continue this trend with SC2. Somewhere boundaries need to be established. These small things don't bother me very much, but combined, they're unsettling.
All that junk about the WoW Warden is just conspiracy tinfoil-hats spouting nonsense. The Warden does no more harm than your typical virus scanner (in fact even less than that). I can understand being cautious, but let's not get hysterical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i44.tinypic.com/2q2g7kw.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i39.tinypic.com/2zyhsfm.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img11.imageshack.us/my.php?image=battlenet5154273.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://cpuwiz.com/smiley/rolleyes7cm.gif)
