blizzard already said I believe that there would be clan wide chat, which is acceptable to me
Blizzard will respond to Bnet 2.0 Issues. - Page 16
Forum Index > SC2 General |
Soel
90 Posts
blizzard already said I believe that there would be clan wide chat, which is acceptable to me | ||
inTheMood
Norway128 Posts
Nice to see a response from blizzard. Having my fingers crossed x | ||
sneaky.waechter
Germany3 Posts
| ||
SiNiquity
United States734 Posts
| ||
Disastorm
United States922 Posts
| ||
Madkipz
Norway1643 Posts
| ||
NeoScout
United States103 Posts
| ||
BigDatez
Canada434 Posts
| ||
Snowfield
1289 Posts
| ||
Iwbhs
United States195 Posts
| ||
NuKedUFirst
Canada3139 Posts
On June 10 2010 03:32 Snowfield wrote: ESPORTS shall prevail! The more and more I think about it, I think Blizzard just did this to shut people up so they won't boycott it as much so Blizzard's SC2 will get better sales. I mean really. It makes sense, next they will say everything will be implemented 3 weeks into the release of the game to make people buy it with high expectations and then they will say there was some error with them so it will be another 3 weeks, etc. I really hope that doesn't happen. There is a lot of potential in this game for eSports in North America as well as Europe. @eSports prevailing KeSPA and Blizzard seem knocking heads. If Starcraft 2 isn't popular or broad casted in Korea it will take away from the market in many other places as well. A lot of people as well as myself have been spending endless hours on Starcraft 2 trying to be the best they can be and dreaming "oh, I wanna get really good at Starcraft 2 and move to Korea, join a pro gaming team, house or clan, etc.." If there is no "pro league" there won't be those dreams. | ||
Umpteen
United Kingdom1570 Posts
Here's what I wrote, anyway: + Show Spoiler + BNet 2.0 isn't exactly feature-complete. In fact it's hard to reconcile the resources allegedly devoted to it with the end product: superficially a slick but otherwise workmanlike front-end. It's tempting to indulge one's inner rage and attribute this kind of thing to incompetence, but that doesn't really add up. I can't imagine taking a tour of Blizzard and, after the amazing art and design and coding departments, being shown the room where they keep a bunch of monitor-licking morons assigned to the core component of the multiplayer experience. That just doesn't sit well with me. What fits better is to suppose they're doing something difficult, and they're doing it carefully. This is after all supposed to be a platform upon which to knit together all their future titles. That is such a huge undertaking; I mean, I've been writing and designing commercial games for a couple of decades and just the shadow cast by that task is fucking scary. You can't think purely in terms of a feature set to suit SC2; you have to think about what Diablo III players are going to want to do, and WOW players, and remember you're creating a single point of failure for all these massively popular titles. For me, the best explanation for the current lack of - say - chat channels is not that chat channels are problematic, but that they're trivial. They've been done a thousand times already. You don't set up a beta to test stuff you already know how to do. What needed testing - what could only be tested on a large scale - was the whole practice/placement/matchmaking/ladder system - so that's what they forced all their beta-testers to use. The same goes for all kinds of features. Custom ladders: clearly they are going to be in there at some point, so groups of friends (guilds) can set up their own private leagues, or TL can set up an invitational pro-league, or whatever. In itself it's an easy feature to implement so the question would seem to be 'why not put it in already?' Ah, but look at the recent BNet 2.0 interface changes. Look at the 'ladder' screen - hey, you can customise the list of ladders displayed there. Isn't that nice? What an elegant way to accommodate custom private ladders in the future, right there in the core interface. I bet you'll be able to drop your Diablo III and WOW PVP ladders right in there, too. It's so important to keep front-and-centre the fact that a) this is a beta, so what you get given to play with is what most needs testing by a large contingent of beta testers, and b) there is a really, really big picture into which BNet's support of SC2 has to fit. We will get guilds, and with that will come guild chat, guild ladders, guild tournaments with direct invitational support. I fully expect to see support for broadcast of live games, with host-assignable 'caster' status so spectators can listen to their choice of commentary, toggle between their view of the game and the caster's, etc etc. Maybe support for delayed live broadcasts to hamper cheating. I expect to see all these things because I look at what's been achieved in the rest of the product and nothing else makes sense. I was subsequently criticised for making 'battered wife' excuses, and: cba to go further in debt, your entire thread can be summed down to ITS BETA L2p 1111 and ultimately and you are just another user with a sub 100 post count from rotten asparagus.com that is content in letting blizzard take you from behind. This reaction is understandable enough, but it's not deserved. Believe me, I'm the first to wince whenever someone begins a sentence with "It's only a beta..." because I know exactly how far along a game is by the time it hits beta. If creating a game were likened to getting pregnant, beta would be the drive to the hospital with fingernails embedded in your forearm. I should have made it clearer that I don't expect a fully-featured BNet to be ready by the game's release. What I'm saying is that - from a developer's perspective - attributing 'missing' BNet features to incompetence, or laziness, or lack of care, or corporate bullshit just doesn't fit. Honestly, the attention to detail in what is there, on every level, just blows my mind. As a for-instance: the patching system that still lets you launch replays recorded in older versions. Ok, there's been the odd bug with that, but to make it happen at all is... I literally don't know how to explain what a big deal that is. Replay files don't store the positions and movements of every unit. They couldn't. Instead they store player input, and literally replay the game all over again as you watch. That's why you can't just click forward in the timeline when you start the replay. But that means you have to be able to roll back all the rules, all the settings, all the maps, everything, so the game plays out exactly as it did in the earlier patch. The care and forethought, and lack of corporate bullshit required to make that kind of architecture happen in a full commercial product is monumental. And of course there are spin-off benefits like the super-powerful editor, because so much logic has been pulled out of the executable. I could go on, but you get the idea. Nothing about SC2 feels careless or low-rent, on any level. So when I look at BNet 2.0, and I think about how many people have been working on it, and I think about the concerns and questions voiced on this site... It's like the end of 'Wargames'. On the one hand you've got screens clearly showing the inbound missiles and fingers reaching for the 'fuck it all' button, and on the other you've got some guy saying "Yes, but does it make sense?" Could it really be that Blizzard managed to source all their infrastructure guys from the vegetable aisle? I find myself thinking thus: what we've been playing is a beta, and large-scale betas serve a specific purpose: to test and refine features that cannot be meaningfully tested any other way, in this case multiplayer balance, the matchmaking systems, and servers under load. Chat channels, clans/guilds, private ladders and tournaments - all this good stuff can be implemented without our help. So Blizzard has a few choices: 1. It can put all the good stuff that doesn't need mass testing into BNet first, then the matchmaking, then open up the beta and hope players aren't too distracted by chat, clans and private ladders to actually test the matchmaking like they're supposed to. 2. It can beta-test the matchmaking and balance first, then sit on an essentially complete game without releasing it until all the extra BNet features are in place. 'All' being, moreover, an entirely arbitrary line in the sand because it'll always be possible to add more stuff. 3. It can beta-test the matchmaking and balance, release the game with this core online functionality so we can start enjoying it straight away, and tech-up BNet later. 4. Same as 3, except that after release they just give everyone the finger and don't enhance BNet, despite it being the cornerstone of success for at least four future retail products. In short, would you rather be playing SC2 while you're waiting for chat channels and clans to get done, or not? If the latter, you can easily simulate Blizzard doing the 'right thing' by just not buying the game for a while. I totally respect that decision if you genuinely can't enjoy the game as it stands. | ||
Madkipz
Norway1643 Posts
In short, would you rather be playing SC2 while you're waiting for chat channels and clans to get done, or not? If the latter, you can easily simulate Blizzard doing the 'right thing' by just not buying the game for a while. I totally respect that decision if you genuinely can't enjoy the game as it stands. in short would you rather send a message to blizzard that releasing an unfinished product, a gold nugget wrapped in shit. Will you tell them that it is wrong? or will you buy the game and cast away the one thing you can take from them, buyer statistics. Because i guarantee you that lesser companies will take this as an example and keep the trend going, (not that there is any game but this one worth buying in the near forseeable future). | ||
Rising_Phoenix
United States370 Posts
That's all blizz needs in the game is Kittehs =D Then they will win life. The Itteh Bitteh Kitteh Comitteh will fix bnet 2.0... with cuteness! | ||
Subversion
South Africa3627 Posts
Either they're putting it off out of fear, or they don't actually know what they are/are not including at the moment. It doesn't take more than a few hours to put together an "address", so it can't be that they need time. So what do you guys think? Are they scared of the rage, or do they actually not know wtf they're doing anymore? | ||
junemermaid
United States981 Posts
On June 10 2010 10:53 Subversion wrote: When is this "comprehensive address" happening? Either they're putting it off out of fear, or they don't actually know what they are/are not including at the moment. It doesn't take more than a few hours to put together an "address", so it can't be that they need time. So what do you guys think? Are they scared of the rage, or do they actually not know wtf they're doing anymore? They probably have better things to do than to address us on what they're doing to B.net right now. They'll let us know when they want to. I expect a statement sometime next week or the week after. It's literally been two days. Maybe they don't even know what they can fit into the time window for release and are probably holding back before they have a better idea of what they can or cannot do (hence the 1-2 week speculation before they say something) | ||
Zed03
Canada112 Posts
| ||
Subversion
South Africa3627 Posts
Please, please give us cross-realm Blizzard | ||
Mastermind
Canada7096 Posts
| ||
ZergTurd
83 Posts
| ||
| ||