BNET 2.0 under serious critics

[MGCǂSpectre]

Did you know that all blizzard beta and general SC2 forums are bombarded with critics about BNET 2.0 what a fail it is? I fully support it and take part in the bashing. Let me show you some statistics. One currently pro SC2 players also writes about the shittiness of BNET 2.0 and we are not talking about the crashes here, no, about the features:

But if you also take into account the crashes, it's really an armageddon, hundreds of threads daily.

http://forums.battle.net/board.html?forumId=25352525&sid=5000

http://forums.battle.net/board.html?forumId=25352531&sid=5010

And Im surprised TL that I always thought of haters of war3 would show such results and support:

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=126853

Your thoughts on Bnet 2.0 making?

A joke (89%)
Okay (9%)
Great (2%)

Which would you rather have:

Warcraft 3 Battle Net (74%)
Starcraft 1 Battle Net (16%)
Battle Net 2.0 (10%)

The most serious being:

-No internal chat commands
-No channels
-No global rankings
-No cross server support
-No Custom game names
-No Custom game passwords
-No Clans
-No Tournaments
-No cross game support
-No lan latency

'But it is just beta'

Do you really think when the release is July they will do all this?

 

[redmarine]

This thread is pretty pointless...

After all, they did state that they would roll out most of those features you listed post release. Also, the current servers aren't reenforced with juicy hardware and software. They're planning on doing in the coming weeks.

Just think it's kinda pathetic that the community would be angry about some beta server issues.

PS: Yeah, they'll release it in time. No worries.

 

[mrzwach]

-No Custom game passwords

Private games?
>_>

-No cross server support

Understandable for general b.net, but they should allow you to cross servers, just limit what you can do (maybe no ladder games or something). This way, you can play tournaments with people on other servers and play with friends, but you won't have laggy noobs from halfway across the world in ladder (because I'm pretty sure thats the issue they wanted to resolve).


Overall, I hope that Blizz returns to a WC3 style for b.net. Also, lack of /f m is saddening.

 

[redmarine]

Private games?
>_>
Understandable for general b.net, but they should allow you to cross servers, just limit what you can do (maybe no ladder games or something). This way, you can play tournaments with people on other servers and play with friends, but you won't have laggy noobs from halfway across the world in ladder (because I'm pretty sure thats the issue they wanted to resolve).

Blizzard stated gateway change would come post release once things have settled.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

If we saw a remade war3 bnet in sc2 skin it would be much better. So, they are not gonna add this soon some things maybe not at all and for chat channels for example they said they would be patches after the release.

Currently this is the 90% of the posts and currently it is a chaos so it may fit the current situation not being able to play customs and all.

Such comments 'it is just' beta' will end up like 'why need beta when game will be in May'.. Because im also observeing gaming and currently it is just a real problem and since even some pro player that never waste time writing on forums made a long post the situation is bad Blizzard just messed up really hard.

 

[mrzwach]

If we saw a remade war3 bnet in sc2 skin it would be much better.

QFT. Don't fix something that isn't broken. Especially if by "fixing" it you make it horribly shitty.

It would be so much better if they just added some of the stuff (ie being able to look at profiles and stuff while in a game, watching replays without exitting B.net) to a modified WC3 UI.

 

[BlinkBoy]

I think these is all overreacting due to b.net servers going weird the last few days.

I think b.net 2.0 is great as it goes, they just need to fix up the servers and work on latency for the time being.

If we saw a remade war3 bnet in sc2 skin it would be much better.

nah really, war3's is more stable, but sc2's is better in all senses. However, I must agree that a global ranking need to be implemented in order to surpass war3's. About the rest:

-No Custom game names
-No Custom game passwords

not big deal when you have parties and a good search system, plus you can make private games in which you add people in parties.

-No internal chat commands
-No channels

channels will be added by release, internal chat commands are pretty much the same as war3's, however, they are hidden, they will eventually document them.

-No cross server support
-No Clans
-No Tournaments
-No cross game support

All these will be implemented after release, remember that wc3 didn't start with them all at once. About cross game support, b.net 2.0 will be used by WoW, Diablo 3, Sc2 and they may actually link both b.nets.

About:
-No lan latency

there was a point in which latency was around 125, however, the servers are really messed up for it to be noticed.

The lesson: Whine after release not now.

 

[Akkernight]

Serious critics? I don't ever consider anyone criticizing something that's in beta as serious

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

The lesson: Whine after release not now.

No im not whining. Just showing the situation in the current unplayable state. But in other places I supported the war3 bnet features back.

I will only agree about waiting before saying anything for beta's final phase. Because whatever you see in beta final phase will be at release. Also for chat channels has been said in blue posts will happen 'some time after the release' so if we have to be realistic, such blind optimism that all will be at release is wrong. And they have to do it asap because if months pass without these, the forums will explode and I will just lol

Something funny from TL:

What's the difference between a stone and Bnet 2.0?

 

[Gleeful]

The only features wc3 didn't have originally were clans and tournaments, and blizzard has already said it could be as long as the next expansion until we see clans in sc2, which is kind of sad.

Passwords for games does actually matter, though it extends from lack of chat channels and the whole client being pretty inefficient in its current design. It's going to be a pain to have to individually invite people to your game if you want to host something big amongst many players. The party system is way too isolated and just flat out doesn't work as well as using chat channels to disperse information.

 

[Akkernight]

If only there was a law against complaining about a beta
Yes the devs can add
-No internal chat commands
-No channels
-No global rankings
-No cross server support
-No Custom game names
-No Custom game passwords
-No Clans
-No Tournaments
-No cross game support
-No lan latency
Before release, depends on how far they've come with each subject.
A beta release is for finding bugs, giving ideas and helping the devs, not to complain at all. But if you are gonna complain then first make sure that you are capable of doing better than them

 

[mrzwach]

It must be really difficult to not create a new system and instead leave the old one in place, eh?

A beta release is for finding bugs, giving ideas and helping the devs, not to complain at all.

Seems rather contradictory. Are we suppoesd to post about bugs but not complain about them while telling the devs to fix them? Are we supposed to rave about how amazing systems are that we think really should be improved?

A beta release is so that people can complain and that these complaints can be addressed before release. If no one ever complained about b.net 2.0, chances are it would stay the same. Which is percisely the reason why people are complaining.

And somehow I lack your blind faith that "everything will be allllllright."

 

[tagg1080]

And somehow I lack your blind faith that "everything will be allllllright."

Blizzard has gone to shit and no one has noticed yet.

They will.

Just let them be.

 

[Dr Super Good]

-No internal chat commands

The chat commands were pretty usless anyway in wc3 and more so in D2.

-No channels

Ok this is a minor issure, organizing games with skilled fans would be more difficuly (aka no channel swat in the case of swat aftermath in WC3)

-No global rankings
-No cross server support

I believe this is only a problem with the beta cause they do not have the resource support for everyone moving into one region, the end product might have these.

-No Custom game names

This could be a problem, as it is hard to know what custom maps currently are being hosted or not.

-No Custom game passwords

Stupid and pointless feature. Although I agree private games are a must have.

-No Clans
-No Tournaments
-No cross game support

Beta only, I am pretty sure clans will be added as even WoW had them with guilds. Tournaments will also be added when they get sponsers and stuff.
Blizzard already said the game will allow communication with WoW and Diablo III players as well as any other Battlenet 2.0 games.

-No lan latency

????um what the hell?????/
This is just stupid. I agree that there is no lan type games anymore meaning that you can not get latency reduction for private lan parties, but the whole LAN is faster in WC3 crap was only cause battlenet was set badly by default. In SC2, the whole reason they moved to UDP was to reduce latency, and infact it is probably better than any WC3 illegal long distance WAN server.

My major hate with SC2 is the lack of privicy, it says your name and everything which is totally dumb. I play games for fun, not so that I can meet a romantic relationship or get brutilly murdered by some psychopathic noob.

 

[mrzwach]

Personally I just hate the fact that chat is scattered amongst chat windows rather than one central location, like in WC3.

Also, my "real name" in SC2 is roar roar. I didn't realize that shit actually mattered when I was registering for an b.net account, lol.

Oh, and DSG, they already have private games. In fact, you can start up a game as private, get a few friends to join, and then host it as public.

 

[Dr Super Good]

mrzwach, you obviously did not read the ToU when you created the account...

Well as you probably have guessed by the whole comment spammage, it is quite difficult to actually host a game.

Additionally I can not find any decent coop maps. The circle TD sucked so much it makes the average green circle TD look good and the other TD was not clear and lacked any form of decent tooltips. Will try again tomorrow when the services are restored.

 

[MrApples]

I agree with everything said here.

 

[mrzwach]

mrzwach, you obviously did not read the ToU when you created the account...

Well as you probably have guessed by the whole comment spammage, it is quite difficult to actually host a game.

Additionally I can not find any decent coop maps. The circle TD sucked so much it makes the average green circle TD look good and the other TD was not clear and lacked any form of decent tooltips. Will try again tomorrow when the services are restored.

I don't care, they aren't going to do anything because someone named themselves "roar roar".

Also, play Impossible One. Its a great co-op map for a couple friends. Just don't play it public, most people on b.net probably would fail at it (it requires you to be very tactical and very careful, losing a unit can mean losing the game).

 

[Just_Spectating]

in blizzard's defense, they finally released a beta in the first place.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

This is a mapmaking forum. People here care to play maps. Exactly why they should remove divisions and ranks cause people dont wanna feel competitive and sucking when they dont play much melee. And leave Single Ladder for those who actually wanto to compete and remove divisions, achievements and so on. Leave icons as people play for them.. See? Such 'whining' what you call it has sense if you care about the game.

 

[Tleno]

Something funny from TL:

What's the difference between a stone and Bnet 2.0?

I lol'd hard.

well honestly I'm disapponted in all Bllizard services, both b.net 1.0 and 2.0 because they allways have something missing. can't they just decide what's the most immportant and immplement it, leaving such nonsence as facebook for later?

 

[Ice Bane]

Will they release all that in time? Are you joking?

They could hire seven billion chinese men with green hats to program it for them in one day.
Yes, they have that much resources and will comply.

 

[Grey Nightmare]

Let's hope so.

 

[tagg1080]

WoW has given them infinite money.

Lets hope that actually use it to make a good game, rather than just being able to delay every game.

 

[Quantum_Menace]

You forgot how you can't simply host a map off the file on your computer; you HAVE to publish it. And removing it from your list of published files means NOBODY can play it. And you have to run it through a censor that bans words like "suicide" even though that's what the Baneling's weapon is called.

 

[redmarine]

You forgot how you can't simply host a map off the file on your computer; you HAVE to publish it. And removing it from your list of published files means NOBODY can play it. And you have to run it through a censor that bans words like "suicide" even though that's what the Baneling's weapon is called.

Words like Africa are also banned.

 

[Toadcop]

Words like Africa are also banned.

xD n/c ...

 

[mrzwach]

God is banned too.

Someone who made a Godzilla map had to rename it, wololol.

Think of this: You cannot name your map with anything that is "censored", or anything that contains censored words. IE, if your map title includes Skyscrapers it is banned because there is "rape" in that.

 

[Dr Super Good]

LOL fail censor is fail.

All I can say is what the hell were they thinking adding such a thing.

 

[Just_Spectating]

blame the kiddies

 

[Dr Super Good]

No, I blame laywers who would try and sue them if any such word appears.

That and a crappy substring search procedure that the censor uses. It should take the surrounding into context so godzilla would not flag up because it has zilla as a suffix.

 

[KaboomMaster]

The thing I find funny is that no one has blamed Activision yet. Honestly Activisionis known as one of the biggest money grubbing publishers in gaming nowadays with their willingness to release large amounts of inferior games along with their gems, and also pushing IPs to their breaking point to squeeze a few more dollars out of the franchise.

Honestly it's not hard to see what the cause of all this is a combination of Dustin Browder, Activision, and changing social tensions. But if you really look at SC2 from its announce to now you'll see that they've slowly been cutting out features both for the system and the gameplay. If you look at what happened with most of the new units, the were simply removed and even old units like the Reaver (which Rob Pardo even paraphrased employee complaints about its removal) were still removed anyway. The game was even announced as a 3 piece set (read standard Activision franchise milking) rather than the game being made complete and then added onto the way an expasion is supposed to work.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

I get no more drops or minimap not show. Sure Blizzard forums were raged seriously but ow it's all good.

 

[PurplePoot]

The minimap is still broken in replays (or so it appears), but not ingame.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

My 1st placement was w.o minimap. Luckily i had it the next games. Replays and custom maps also may not show minimap but that's acceptable for beta. I told Blizzard that I <3 them, well I never bashed them but also posted on Beta forums during the dropping. I felt bad when seeing how much Blizzard were bashed on all forums everywhere.

 

[Just_Spectating]

well, they did majorly ph*ck up