This guy got through to Blizzard

[mrzwach]

Stimmed marines serve as rather great Terran GtA.

Also, Cardinian, Starcraft Ghost isn't being developed. Also, companies generally don't develop a game AND its expansion packs all at once, so more like 3 projects.
Blizz was a small company when it made SC1. They did not have the resources or capabilities to manage multiple projects at once - now they do.

Also, SC1 was not finished when it was finished, as it had much balancing done after release as well.

To be honest, if anyone of these people really want to change, they are going to have to done something beyond whining on blogs. The best part is how these people spend pages complaining, yet conclude with "OH WELL I GUESS I'LL BUY THE GAME ANYWAYS". If you really wanted Blizzard to care, you could just like, uno, not buy the game.

Alternatively, if you do buy the game you are ultimately stating it is worth your time and money.

 

[Deathcom3s]

I was talking Mech, not Bio. I apologize for not clarifying.

 

[PurplePoot]

Coming up with cool ideas and implementing them has the great advantage of keeping diversity, but yes, Terran desperately needs good Ground to Air to make TvT less frustrating.

--

mrz, they serve as decent GtA if the air isn't supported. Try using your stimmed marines against Marine/Tank/Viking/Banshee.

 

[JackRCDF]

@DSG The editor sucks hard. I've worked as an indie game designer for several years now. One editor I used is probably 10 years old now. It has more functionality and is FAR better organized than Galaxyedit. Blizzard should have done a lot better than what they have done with the editor. It's laughable that you think they have done a good job, I've seen 15 year olds code better editors.

 

[Dr Super Good]

@DSG The editor sucks hard. I've worked as an indie game designer for several years now. One editor I used is probably 10 years old now. It has more functionality and is FAR better organized than Galaxyedit. Blizzard should have done a lot better than what they have done with the editor. It's laughable that you think they have done a good job, I've seen 15 year olds code better editors.

Your argument is laughable purly due to everything being opinions. Again you use the "I do not like it so it sucks" approch which makes no sense.

You need to provide evidence why it is bad.

For example. The SC2 editor has major problems with game varients and attributes. Locking some of their fields will cause a map publishing error or curropted map attribute error when trying to play on battlenet. Editors should not allow options to be choosen that let it land in an invalid or seriously bugged state without atleast warning of the results.

What you are doing is...
The editor sucks. Advancement sucks. Old games are better. Blizzard sucks. Dr Super Good sucks. Something false is true.

As you can see your argument is pretty shallow I must say. Especially considering this is a beta editor. For the final release, I do expect some changes as they would be unable to apply them to the beta without huge downloads.

 

[AKAIMAX]

Your argument is laughable purly due to everything being opinions. Again you use the "I do not like it so it sucks" approch which makes no sense.

You need to provide evidence why it is bad.

For example. The SC2 editor has major problems with game varients and attributes. Locking some of their fields will cause a map publishing error or curropted map attribute error when trying to play on battlenet. Editors should not allow options to be choosen that let it land in an invalid or seriously bugged state without atleast warning of the results.

What you are doing is...
The editor sucks. Advancement sucks. Old games are better. Blizzard sucks. Dr Super Good sucks. Something false is true.

As you can see your argument is pretty shallow I must say. Especially considering this is a beta editor. For the final release, I do expect some changes as they would be unable to apply them to the beta without huge downloads.

Its funny you say that because hes comparing which is evidence. He is saying why it sucks. its unorignized. And he isn't the only person saying this, and its not a handful of people either. Its pretty much everyone who used the Data Editor that said its disorginized. Doesn't that tell you enough?

 

[CrashLemon]

I prefer patches over delaying the game, it worked for Sc1, why wouldn't it work for Sc2?

 

[AKAIMAX]

So do i but blizzard said they won't change these problems like disorginized editor and whatnot.

 

[JackRCDF]

You're right, I don't like it. It does suck. Everyone but yourself and one other person I know (he's a chronic troll) hate it. Of course, just because many people dislike it doesn't mean it sucks, although as Toyota reminds us, 'Millions can't be wrong.'

So here are some reasons that are, perhaps, easier for you to comprehend.
1. The UI of galaxyedit is outdated. Many WC3 players say it is similiar to World Edit, which is an old editor. It should have been improved on since then, instead of being very similiar.

2. It has, apparently, become WORSE than World Edit in some areas. While I can't vouch for this myself, several people have told me that the terrain tools in GE are harder to use than WE.

3. Disorganized. The data editor especially is incredibly counter-productive. Currently, there's a big fat list for each unit. No wait, there's a list for each actor. Wait no, there's a list for the actor, effects, buttons, unit as a whole, weapons, and more. What's more, these lists aren't even compiled in a logical, productive manner. Blizzard should have made it with often-changed fields first, with groups of a similiar nature grouped together. The color system is confusing and un-necessary.

There are numerous other UI problems which are annoying to work with. There's also the crappy debugging tool for galaxyscript, the limited and basic galaxyscript editor, several annoyances with triggering such as string conversion. There are numerous limits imposed, such as a small amount of bank variables per map.

As the above poster said, Blizzard said they wouldn't change the editor much anymore, explaining that 'mapping is a complex thing' or some similiar crap. Sure it's complicated, but it shouldn't be counter-intuitive. Game design is easier than this, and it shouldn't be.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3f/Alpha_build_(StarCraft).png

That is what Starcraft I looked like in Alpha. Compare that to what Starcraft I at release looked like. It is plain to see that they are not devoting the time and effort into refining, balancing and making SC:2 perfect...

Ohhh. Never seen that, looks like SC1 was a futuristic Warcraft 1, cause it looked like it. The graphics were like a good quality graphics with Invert Colors. Then they remade the interface to a whole new level, changed the graphics to someting never seen before, then followed the same interface in War3 and SC2.

My critics fot the editor are:

Worse Unit palette or is there a palette at all where you can switch faster b-n doodads, units, terrain etc ? The war3 palettes were much better than having to click 'Layers' and go to 'Units', 'Doodads' layers.

The Data editor is indeed a mess. A tab has its units but look, you have to change the Scale Value of a unit from another branch of the unit, you have to change the model frm a third branch aka actor. Things are just scattered, messy, 1 piece of data is changed frm one place, another frm another place... You think there is no damage change, ahh you click some of the other actors/weapons and see that there is actually damage but it is added frm another place.

FLying height? never seen that

 

[JackRCDF]

Oh, and DSG, your 4th paragraph is a straw man fallacy except for the first statement, 'The editor sucks.'

 

[Doctor-Pepper]

Lol, getting through to blizzard? Do you think blizzard even red that post?

I have been making wc3 maps since day one of the release. Now, i loooooove Starcraft 2. Graphics, balance, Trigger Editor, Data Editor. I dont really care about 5 maps, 10mb limit. I am also sure that those are beta restrictions. It will be increased or possibly have an expansion fee. I remember the days when i was making wc3 maps under 2mb, squeezing everything together, because Bnet downloads took forever for everyone to dl the map.

There are only 3 things that are pissing hell out of me. (im sure those will change by the release)

-CG Lobby: Why cant they fit 12 players on 1 screen, WHY would we ever need to scroll
-Chat Channels: Whyyyy are there no channels? It seems like they want to isolate us as much as possible. The only human interaction we get while playing, is by actually playing ladder of CG, where everyone is too busy to type a line of text.
-Adding Friends: Whhyyy the hell do i need to ask people for their email address ? Why cant i play a fun good game with a random guy, add him by his nickname and start chatting with him as a friend?

It's really hard to meet new people on the current Bnet. It's also not cool to display your real name in bigger format than your nickname. I really dont want to mix gaming with non gaming moments. (but i can live with it)

KaboomMaster, mannnn u have a strong opinions about everything. You really feel obligated to let everyone know how you feel over and over and over and over again. Jeezzz Take a breezer

 

[ike_ike]

1. The UI of galaxyedit is outdated. Many WC3 players say it is similiar to World Edit, which is an old editor. It should have been improved on since then, instead of being very similiar.

People don't want things to change, people want everything to change.

 

[Gleeful]

Locally hosting maps was just a better system to use. Being able to download maps without joining them is not enough of an advantage to warrant the restrictions that will come in place with this system. Yeah, they may raise the bar and yeah, it makes sense to have filesize limits when you're using blizzard's bandwidth. However, you forget that you're still (and likely always will be) limited to the number of physical maps you can publish. Not to mention the naming restrictions (censorship + no duplicate names), or the terrible UI that has come with this system.

Publishing to an "official" battle.net cloud really only makes sense for very high popularity maps and whatever premium marketplace blizzard has in store for us. But it does not replace a fully functional map hosting system.

 

[Doctor-Pepper]

I just hope that there will be an option to get your map on top of the list when you need to test it in full team multiplayer

I think that the naming restriction is to maintain the game T rating, no way around there

 

[LordDz]

@DSG The editor sucks hard. I've worked as an indie game designer for several years now. One editor I used is probably 10 years old now. It has more functionality and is FAR better organized than Galaxyedit. Blizzard should have done a lot better than what they have done with the editor. It's laughable that you think they have done a good job, I've seen 15 year olds code better editors.

What editor? Visual 2005 c++?

I just hope that there will be an option to get your map on top of the list when you need to test it in full team multiplayer

I think that the naming restriction is to maintain the game T rating, no way around there

Spam your friends to join you?

 

[BlinkBoy]

It's funny how much people whine over it, but at the end, it will be a success. Just like it has always been. After all, the editor and b.net are in their earlier stages, they will eventually develop to be a lot better in no time.

 

[Dr Super Good]

What people fail to see is the data editor follows a prety easy to understand system of logic. The colours represent which fields were altered by that particular piece of data (some of the fields are based on a parents value). It is pretty much a large database you are modifying. The result is it probably will load a lot faster than the same ammount of data modifications in WC3 which had a lot of O(n) opperations in its loading process acording to its bytecode instructions.

The data editor might not group fields together which are commonly modifed, but by doing so allows all fields to be found more easilly. When I want to modify shield I go down until I find shield (as its in alphebetical order this is easy). The same goes for every field. I do admit that it was a bit cheap of them to not allow you to customize the display of fields, so you could have shield and life at the top for example if for some reasn you wanted it so however the current system is far from unusable.

My major complaint with the data editor is the lack of easy linking of different data and types. They should allow you to link data together via some sort of relationship overview instead of the current relationship diagram which only shows related stuff to a certain degree. For example actors used by effects are not shows when viewing a unit despite it having the effect so copying the unit and the effect will cause the effect to miss data. It should include the actor for the effect in the scope of the relationship table so you can copy it as well.

Also they could have had a linkage diagram which you could drag and drop to allow you to more easilly attach stuff would be good. Eg you could drag a unit to an actor and it will provide you with a list of ways to attach the two together. However this would only save time and is not nescescary for the function of the editor.

Ofcourse the terraining tools are more complex cause WC3 and SC2 terrains are totally different.

In WC3, you had like 32 cliff levels, a mesh offset level and a tile type for each square on the map with a varience counter and an occasional cliff ramp. You could also turn on or off the water / selection offset level.
In SC2 you have 4 cliff levels, a much finer mesh offset level and a composite tile map where each square cand contain more than 1 texture with a blend ratio. As well as the ramps, you can also enable certain types of water on tiles. There are also randomly generated doodads for terrain which can make it look more interesting. This is not forgeting the fact that the terrain is fully bumpmaped and effected by HDR.

Also the fact that we no longer can host maps means...
No more custom kick.
No more banlists.
No more advert bots.
No more "PLEASE HOST X I AM A NOOB AND CAN NOT HOST"
No more NO DL.
No more people hosting who should not host.
No more game splits cause the host noob quit.
No more name spoofers.

No chat channels also mean...
No more spam bots.
No more advert spam bots.

 

[Doctor-Pepper]

Lol, its like taking away all mechanical transportation and saying: "Look at the bright side, no more plane crashes and car accidents"

Quote Dr.Good:
Get da hell out of here whiny midgets, its my time to whine about the data editor.

But i do agree with you all. It could be better, but im still crazy about the whole package it delivers now

 

[Just_Spectating]

actors are so superfluous.

they could have stayed with the way War3's editor made units.

actors and models make making a unit take so much longer than it needs to be.

 

[Gleeful]

Also the fact that we no longer can host maps means...
No more custom kick.
No more banlists.
No more advert bots.
No more "PLEASE HOST X I AM A NOOB AND CAN NOT HOST"
No more NO DL.
No more people hosting who should not host.
No more game splits cause the host noob quit.
No more name spoofers.

No chat channels also mean...
No more spam bots.
No more advert spam bots.

This is a really poor assessment.

For one, bots will be at a minimum if they exist at all because unlike wc3 or sc1 you will have to buy a whole new game if you want a new account. No one is going to use third-party tools like ban lists, spoofers or custom kicks or whatever when it could easily cost them $60. Not that any of that is really worth having the inane restrictions on filesize or map names, or the issue with popularity, or the fact that players can sit in games and cockblock new games from being made altogether, or that map-makers can remove their map from the cloud entirely and it can never be hosted again.

Moreover, you were never forced to join the public chat channels in wc3. Even if you ended up in one, you always had the option of sitting in the void or making a private chat channel. The fact is that without chat channels (and by extension, password system for maps) there is no functionality to easily organize large custom games with 6+ players. That may not be an issue for you personally, but it is extremely detrimental to many other players who organize tournaments, large ffa's, rp's or any other custom game with a lot of players.

 

[Just_Spectating]

no chat channels also mean no clan channels

 

[Doctor-Pepper]

No way i that i can get 12 friends together to test a map, multiple times a day, as in wc3

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

No more "PLEASE HOST X I AM A NOOB AND CAN NOT HOST"

Hahah! Maybe im gonna miss that... not! This just proves that NOOB is not a myth, it exists. It's referred to as 'retard' in most of the cases. But let me give a better example: Game Name: CAN I HOST?

Whatever the pluses are of no chat channels I hope you are not saying it is ok without them, DSG.

I found an annoying feature that you cant add water on higher levels in SC2 editor. It is always the same level. so either lower the ground to make it 'deep' or increase the coastlines to not make the water above the cloastlines.

 

[LordDz]

No way i that i can get 12 friends together to test a map, multiple times a day, as in wc3

Hiveworkshop?

 

[Deathcom3s]

I completely agree with you on the current method of linking DSG. I have no idea what they were thinking when they designed their current method.

 

[Nogusta]

Oh man, this post I find so disgraceful. You all do realize that the author of those posts that the TC is linking is Iskatumesk. You do realize that this is a guy who constantly claims he is suffering from mental problems right? This guy is literally off his rocker. He doesn't even have one publically released custom mod project and calls himself legendary. That is beyond shameless. He is not legendary at all. Normally you would need someone ELSE to call you legendary and actually make a legend about you.

This is a guy that shamelessly puts his own work on the level of Dota. This is the same guy that calls himself a casual gamer despite spending all his time hours working with modding editors (not actual nitty gritty code). The fact that he wants to call himself a casual gamer because he has completely redefined the term to his own definition is ridiculous. If you don't want to adhere to the English language that everyone understands then at least make up a word no one has heard before rather then redefining one we already understand. Iskatumesk is the most hardcore and deluded gamer I have ever seen.

Look at all those posts, all he does is plug his own work everywhere, this guy is an attention whore. So if I wrote posts that long then apparently that makes my facts more correct right? Wrong. We don't even have ANY proof of anything he did or ANY of his claims, and his choice of words clearly indicates exaggeration and bias. There are some obvious gripes that we can all identify with in those posts about SC2 but the rest of the stuff he says is complete hogwash.

The most annoying thing here is that the TC thinks that he actually "got through" to Blizzard. Wrong. Nowhere in those posts is proof of that indication. Next time you make a statement like that, bring better "proof" than a post from a mental case.

 

[Deathcom3s]

I don't much care about the fact that he calls himself legendary. I was trying to focus on the points be brings up in the links that are quite valid, and have been validated by multiple people throughout this thread.

And meh, I actually wanted to change the title of the thread, as well as the first post after i posted it, but i don't have the necessary powers to change thread titles.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

OK I started with hating TL as they banned me over 2 ingame questions that they found 'silly'. I also disliked them cause I thought of them as war3 haters and they are some. However, I got very impressed by seeing how SC1 players give war3 bnet as an example of what Bnet 2.0 needs and what points they bring: (Now I can say I like TL, new account big deal over old ban)

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

QFT:

no one cares about adding facebook friends or achievements or portraits or what randomly selected metal your league happens to be or making yourself feel good about being rank 4 in bronze league "omgz im rank 4 at being sh*t"

post #3

This would make sense, if it wasn't for one very simple thing: Blizzard has said that most of the things we are asking for will not be in the game for release.

Ladder rankings
I don't know what they've said about this except that they are aware people want to see their rankings. When I first heard about the division system, man, I was excited. I pictured a competitive setting where you'd advance from division to division, with play offs, with tournaments, with everything you can imagine.

Instead we get this "everyone is a winner" bullshit. Yeah, make all the divisions equal, that's fucking awesome. Yeah, make it so that you can't compare your rankings between divisons, that's just great. Oh and while you are at it, why not make it so you can't view anything except YOUR divison. Oh and hey, having divisions go by number is just far too scary when someone gets put in division 500, let's give them random names.

This isn't the fundamental support needed to create a competitive enviornment (which, incidentally, a ladder is), it's KINDERGARTEN. If you are old enough to play SC2, you are old enough to realize that there are people out there who are better than you, and if the shock of discovering this is too much for you, [/U]well, you were going to find out sooner or later, at least this way you are unlikely to get physically hurt in the process

My gosh, the thread starter and post#3, I think it is a well known top player, this FrozenArbiter really makes me feel some sexually pleasant feeling, omg omg his arguments are awesome, he totally makes me feel some sort of orgasm, what a cool and smart guy. +100000 cause that's MY THOUGHTS 200%

I know this thread is about MAPMAKIN issues but that's exactly why no need to keep history of custom games, no need to be ranked in shit league and feel shit about it when you simply wanna play for fun. SO this is concerning all.

Bnet is great! I love it, don't you?



I saw some happy people here, maybe you are the 340 number, gratz! You get free candies and premium membership frm Blizzard.

 

[JackRCDF]

@the guy saying Mesk isn't legendary

He is legendary. Even though he had schizophrenia, he still managed to make some incredible SC mods. His voice acting is high quality. He's writing a book, he mods several games, and all this through mental illness. And no, that doesn't mean he's crazy; saying that just shows your ignorance of mental disease. I suggest you google 'schizophrenia' sometime to further your understanding. I doubt you could do or have done anything near what he's done, mental disease or not. And notice how many people agree with him, here, at TL, and at the bnet forums. He's voicing the opinions of the masses, not saying his own thing that everyone disagrees with.

 

[Mooglefrooglian]

I found his opening extremley arrogant, but he did bring up many valid points.

 

[PurplePoot]

Well, they're totally wrong, since a lot of people like portraits, achievements, and the facebook feature.

On top of that, statistics 101: that poll is from an incredibly biased sample space.

 

[mrzwach]

@the guy saying Mesk isn't legendary

He is legendary. Even though he had schizophrenia, he still managed to make some incredible SC mods. His voice acting is high quality. He's writing a book, he mods several games, and all this through mental illness. And no, that doesn't mean he's crazy; saying that just shows your ignorance of mental disease. I suggest you google 'schizophrenia' sometime to further your understanding. I doubt you could do or have done anything near what he's done, mental disease or not. And notice how many people agree with him, here, at TL, and at the bnet forums. He's voicing the opinions of the masses, not saying his own thing that everyone disagrees with.

If he was so legendary, why has nothing he has made "tasted the waters of success"? Not refuting your point, just wondering. Because honestly, if he was as good as people say he was, I would have to imagine he was pretty damn successful (or at least somewhat)


On a side note, how chat works in SC2 vs WC3

WC3: Join public chat.
Get spammed by bots.
Figure out a private channel to hang out with your friends.
Join channel.
Chat!

SC2: Log in.
Invite friends to chatroom.
Chat!

Really, I fail to see an issue provided that Blizz gives adequate support for group chat and the like. As for "oh teh noes I don't want to be real id frendz!!1", you can like, uno, make a proxy email so you don't get spammed.

Additionally, don't worry about peopel seeing your real name because if they want to they can just use the friends of friends option to figure it out. Note that both me and Mooglefrooglian have 99 real id friends on Bnet currently (the limit) and I got them all in about a day. So yeah, privacy is a joke, but honestly no one really gives a flying shit about what your real name is.

Personally, ladder rankings seem to work rather well. It helped that when I was a complete noob I was facing off against other complete noobs I had a decent chance at actually beating, and now that I am better I can still face off against people of equivalent skill so its not that I'm constantly getting steamrolled by koreans or completely owning someone playing a RTS game for the first time ever.

Also, Team Liquid is a rather elitist community (not necessarily a really bad thing, I hang out with them a lot on bnet) which greatly influences their opinions for obvious reasons. Obviously they do not see the value in leagues as they are nothing less than diamond, and obviously they want Blizzard to cater to pro players, like themselves.


On a side note, anyone finding it horribly ironic how people who want chat channels are screaming for them and saying "if you don't like them, you can just IGNORE THEM LOL!!!" while at the same time constantly bitching about facebook integration, without realizing that they could just ignore that, like the rest of bnet has learned to do?

/rant

 

[Nogusta]

@the guy saying Mesk isn't legendary

He is legendary. Even though he had schizophrenia, he still managed to make some incredible SC mods. His voice acting is high quality. He's writing a book, he mods several games, and all this through mental illness. And no, that doesn't mean he's crazy; saying that just shows your ignorance of mental disease. I suggest you google 'schizophrenia' sometime to further your understanding. I doubt you could do or have done anything near what he's done, mental disease or not. And notice how many people agree with him, here, at TL, and at the bnet forums. He's voicing the opinions of the masses, not saying his own thing that everyone disagrees with.

Do you really want me to tear this apart so bad? Having schizophrenia is a mental disorder, thanks for agreeing with me that he has one, I don't see the part where I misunderstood anything. Besides, I only said that because it is a possible reason for all the ridiculous stuff he continually spews out of his keyboard.

I like how you said "here, at TL", thanks for giving yourself away as a TL member, but we're not in TL right now are we?

"he's voicing the opinions of the masses" <-- where in the hell did you get that idea? When your TL buddies become the whole world, then please let me know, otherwise we have no idea what the "masses" really want. He's likely a vocal minority, like the rest of the loud complaining ppl on TL and every other forum. You realize you can't just toss out unjustified "facts" without proof right? Saying it like a fact doesn't make it so, you're just like Iskatumesk in that case.

"His voice acting is high quality. He's writing a book, he mods several games, and all this through mental illness" <-- grow up, it's not like your opinion on how good he does something even matters. Yes he's writing a book, but it could be terrible for all we know, even Iskatumesk knows not to send it to a publisher, or they might call him crazy for writing such crap. If you want a counter opinion, there you have it. Hey here's a few more: His voice acting isn't professional level work at all. Go Google good voice acting, you might learn something. Oh and his "music" is complete garbage. The arrangements are frighteningly simple, I doubt he knows enough music theory to even get his work accepted at OC remix (if he dared to ruin a classic VG song anyways). Did my opinion make you happy? No, I don't think it did, so please refrain from posting unjustified bs in the future.

"I doubt you could do or have done anything near what he's done, mental disease or not" <--- Again, you're not using your brain. I am not comparing someone like myself who doesn't mod games to someone like Iskatumesk, my skill is irrelevant. I am comparing him to other modders in the field in which he calls himself "legendary". This guy dares to put his work on the same level as Dota for godsakes, how blinded are you to accept that kind of statement without questioning how ridiculous that sounds. He hasn't even finished or released any of his projects, and yet he is so arrogant to call himself "legendary". You are such a fanboy you don't even realize that we have no proof that he even really has a mental disease. We only have his word, which is worthless on the Internet. I wouldn't mind taking back my statement on calling him a mental case in the event that he might be (GASP) a liar.

"and notice how many people agree with him, here, at TL, and at the bnet forums" <--- This makes you sound like such a tool. My mom agrees with me, therefore I must be right. Wrong. Just because people agree with a person doesn't make him/her right.

Iskatumesk has stated enough times that he isn't going to buy SC2. Here's a good question: Why is he complaining about a game he isn't going to buy and isn't even finished?

Answer: Because he wants to buy it and/or wants the developers to change it into something he likes. But even with this in mind he comes out with a premature statement like "I am not going to buy Sc2." just for shock value. All I see here is an overreacting 5 year old preaching to other 5 year olds that don't seem to ever do any critical thinking.

Yes. There are real sc2 issues Iskatumesk has mentioned in his post that I can agree with, but again, I must restate that EVERYTHING else other than those real issues is among some of the most ridiculous and braindead things I have ever read. If you want an example, just read the part where he says he is a casual gamer by completely redefining the term to one that suits his liking. It's not like I can change reality just because I feel like it, or else I'd be seen as crazy. Wow see what I did there? I hope you were able to comprehend everything I said in between sucking up to people that write 5000 word essays for posts at TL. In that case you're probably loving this one already huh?

I'm done here. It's good that some people here at least see that there is no reason to believe anything Iskatumesk says. Even the legit issues that Iskatumesk brings up about Sc2 often miss the "big picture", and that's because he doesn't understand enough about the world, or about finance, politics, or even game design. The same goes with all the hating they're doing down at TL on Bobby Kotick. I'll let you try to do the thinking on why the ppl at TL could be wrong. So many people refuse to look at all the angles of decisions like the ones Blizzard makes, and that is how you get someone as deluded as Iskatumesk.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

Additionally, don't worry about peopel seeing your real name because if they want to they can just use the friends of friends option to figure it out. Note that both me and Mooglefrooglian have 99 real id friends on Bnet currently (the limit) and I got them all in about a day. So yeah, privacy is a joke, but honestly no one really gives a flying shit about what your real name is.

Personally, ladder rankings seem to work rather well. It helped that when I was a complete noob I was facing off against other complete noobs I had a decent chance at actually beating, and now that I am better I can still face off against people of equivalent skill so its not that I'm constantly getting steamrolled by koreans or completely owning someone playing a RTS game for the first time ever.

Also, Team Liquid is a rather elitist community (not necessarily a really bad thing, I hang out with them a lot on bnet) which greatly influences their opinions for obvious reasons. Obviously they do not see the value in leagues as they are nothing less than diamond, and obviously they want Blizzard to cater to pro players, like themselves.

Well, at least when you know the one you add as real ID, you can basically trust his friends too. Example: I may add a teammate from war3 as real ID (why not?). He may add some of his buddies also from my team, so Idc that they would know me too. But real ID only available atm means ppl you totally dont know, that's the current situation.

The ranking is competitive as I believe, FrozenArbiter (Jinro?) is saying. When you are a mapmaker you don't wanna 'compete'. Taht's the point they bring and it is a good point. For me, I compete, but not enough, thus in war3 I felt fine that Im not top and that I was Unranked when using many accounts. So I dont see a reason to want to be in a league if you really are not gonna Go PRO.

Just an excuse - hey look at me, I hez 10 wins, I hez 50 wins? No sorry better w/o it, icons were just fine, ladder has the point of playing hard not making 5 wins and - acheivement.. or not using such achievements if it will be so easy.

For me seeing someone is in Diamond is 1 BIG NOTHING. It proved many got casually in it, so leagues are just useless. And so not a measure of skill.

It is better to know where you are on real ladder aka 900th than being first in bronze and having a fake impression how good you are. If you don't play for that you don't need leagues, ranks achievements. They should be for hard players. Icons/portraits are the good reward for fun and war3 ppl enjoyed it.

 

[Doctor-Pepper]

blablabla

I assume that a part of this post was directed at me.
See, i am in my early 20's , because it's a more adolescent age group, I have 0 Real ID facebook friends that are playing sc2. My every single wc3 and sc2 friend is a mapmaker, who are all making maps (as they should), so its very rare that we can play together.
There is no public chat [Edit: Srr has a typo]
People in ladder and CG dont communicate
Its hard to meet new people like that, the only option is a forum.

As maybe no1 gives a crap about your name, but I really don't want someone from work or college recognizing my Battle.net name, who might start nagging about where and when,what game i've played.

 

[JackRCDF]

@Nogusta

You said he was 'off his rocker', directly after you said he has a mental illness. It's fairly logical to conclude that you think he's crazy because of his mental illness, which, as I pointed out, is ridiculous if you understand even a little about mental illnesses.

I am not a TL member as such. I made an account a while ago, but can't remember the username let alone the password. I said 'here' meaning hive, 'at TL' meaning TL, and 'at the bnet forums' meaning the battle.net forums. Not complicated. Interesting how your whole attitude towards me became a RAAAH I HATE YOU NUB TLer! after you misinterpreted me...shows you have a lot of prejudice.

Straw man argument. I said 'the masses' not 'the whole world'. There are a significant number of people at hive, at TL, at staredit.net, at the bnet forums, and at campaigncreations that agree with him. In fact, a 'mass' of people agree with him. 'The masses' agree with him. I see a small, albeit vocal, minority opposing him, both here and at TL.

I said nothing about his music, nor did I say anything about him publishing his book. Straw man again. I've read excerpts from his book, and it's decent quality, better than half the rubbish out there, but not amazingly good.

Other modders in his field? He's one of the best starcraft modders, and at LEAST on their level. Dota is crap. Popular crap, but not incredibly complicated. It isn't even a mod. He's released several projects, the best of which would be In The Admiral's Service, and Armageddon Onslaught. Both are among the most downloaded SC mods, and are the closest to popular that a SC mod has ever been. As for him having a mental disease, sure he could be lying. I doubt it, but it's possible.

No, just people agree with him doesn't make him right. I didn't say it did. Straw man fallacy again. I used the fact that many people agree with him to support my statement that he voices many of the opinions of the masses. Their opinions may or may not be CORRECT, but that wasn't what I was saying.

Sure, he wants the developers to change it. Don't you? He just has enough problems with it that he won't buy it until it's a product he will enjoy. Nothing wrong with that, although you seem to think so.

I never said I agreed with anything Mesk said, I merely said that he was legendary. Straw man fallacy AGAIN. You assumed I agreed with him (or is it that I'm 'sucking up to his 5000word post?') Now, some things he says I do NOT agree with, casual gamer being one of them. Over all, I agree with him, but there are certain points I disagree with.

As for TL hating on blizzards decisions? They aren't the only ones. A lot of people are disappointed in the turn SC2 has taken, because blizzard appears to be turning it into a cash cow, instead of making a game that is, first and foremost, an enjoyable, balanced, high-quality game. Blizzard used to make games like that, but they don't often anymore.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

And wouldn't you agree that if they dont wanna make Single Ladder, then BY ALL means - remove divisions! Make a single bronze/silver/ etc not 100 silver divisions etc. Divisions are the most stupid thing of the ranking system.

Husky that you know from video replays also says it.

Is it biased again? I say one shouldn't talk that unless doing own research throughout forums including battle net forums how many hate it..

 

[PurplePoot]

My every single wc3 and sc2 friend is a mapmaker, who are all making maps (as they should), so its very rare that we can play together.

I'm a modder and I seem to find more time to play than most people on this forum do.

Just because you mod doesn't mean you have to only mod.

There is no private chat

Well now you're just making stuff up.

Its hard to meet new people like that, the only option is a forum.

Try harder. I have added around five people in the past week who I didn't know previously. If you make no effort, you won't meet people, but that's just a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I said 'the masses' not 'the whole world'. There are a significant number of people at hive, at TL, at staredit.net, at the bnet forums, and at campaigncreations that agree with him. In fact, a 'mass' of people agree with him. 'The masses' agree with him. I see a small, albeit vocal, minority opposing him, both here and at TL.

A small minority in the vocal minority opposes the rest of the vocal minority, therefore the rest is in fact a majority?

"The masses" means "the majority of people" not just "a lot of people". Dictionaries--you're doing it wrong.

Other modders in his field? He's one of the best starcraft modders, and at LEAST on their level. Dota is crap. Popular crap, but not incredibly complicated. It isn't even a mod. He's released several projects, the best of which would be In The Admiral's Service, and Armageddon Onslaught. Both are among the most downloaded SC mods, and are the closest to popular that a SC mod has ever been. As for him having a mental disease, sure he could be lying. I doubt it, but it's possible.

What happened to not tasting the waters of success? Or are they among the most downloaded SC mods because nobody gives two shits about SC mods?

As for TL hating on blizzards decisions? They aren't the only ones. A lot of people are disappointed in the turn SC2 has taken, because blizzard appears to be turning it into a cash cow, instead of making a game that is, first and foremost, an enjoyable, balanced, high-quality game. Blizzard used to make games like that, but they don't often anymore.

What the fuck? Most of these changes cannot be described as a money grab no matter how much you try to twist them.

Blizzard used to make games like that, and they still make games like that. They don't "often" make games like that because they don't "often" make games period.

A lot of people are disappointed by the turn every Blizzard game takes, because they want it to be just like the last one rather than trying some new stuff.

 

[Gleeful]

New stuff is great, but it shouldn't be put in priority over basic features that work. In IM-based chat, there is no way to organize large games without going third-party. Period. There's no refuting that.

Achievements, decals, facebook integration etc. is all nice and well. But most people would rather have clans and chat channels before those things because they're mostly just fluff. Also, I think it's deceiving to say the new chat is any simpler. For one, in wc3 you did not have to enter a public chat channel at all. There is a "channel" button in the top left corner that you can use to directly enter another channel.

Secondly, in sc2 you have to add people to your friends list to chat with them. And with the naming system in a mess, even adding friends isn't convenient. You basically have to ask for the person's email (or identifier as it was previously) to friend people or find a post-game button that will do it for you. All I want to be able to do is look at someones name and either message them or friend them. Why does it have to be any more difficult than that?

And the map publishing system is even worse than the situation for chat.

Also, while you can't make direct accusations against blizzard for trying to monetize everything just yet--Here's what they're not doing: they're not being accommodating. They implement a one-account only system to combat smurfing/bots etc, but they haven't shown even mild interest in providing an alternative means to people who just want to change their name once and awhile. Nor have they addressed the family issue--want to share sc2 with your brother or your son? You will either have to deal with having to use the same ladder ranking or buy another copy of the game. Not very intuitive. Want to play cross-region? You have to buy another copy of the game. There are plenty of ways to overcome the latency issues, but they just aren't interested.

I'm all for adding new things. I love the new units, I love how the micro/macro has played out in melee. I love the editor. But I am not going to sit here and pretend that battle.net works in its new incarnation, because it doesn't.

 

[mrzwach]

The ranking is competitive as I believe, FrozenArbiter (Jinro?) is saying. When you are a mapmaker you don't wanna 'compete'. Taht's the point they bring and it is a good point. For me, I compete, but not enough, thus in war3 I felt fine that Im not top and that I was Unranked when using many accounts. So I dont see a reason to want to be in a league if you really are not gonna Go PRO.

Thus the point of bonus pool? I seem to do rather fine just playing a few games each day.

And wouldn't you agree that if they dont wanna make Single Ladder, then BY ALL means - remove divisions! Make a single bronze/silver/ etc not 100 silver divisions etc. Divisions are the most stupid thing of the ranking system.

I somewhat agree with this, perhaps just make an ability to see how you are ranked among all SC2 players (regardless of division) and what rank you are in all of the players in the same level division as you.

See, i am in my early 20's , because it's a more adolescent age group, I have 0 Real ID facebook friends that are playing sc2. My every single wc3 and sc2 friend is a mapmaker, who are all making maps (as they should), so its very rare that we can play together.

I actually have met quite a few people through SC2 that I never know before, so lol. Its true though that I had a circle of friends carried on from WC3, but still. I'm pretty sure/hopeful they are adding in more options for group chat, though.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

Well now you're just making stuff up.

Well now you're just making stuff up.

A lot of people are disappointed by the turn every Blizzard game takes, because they want it to be just like the last one rather than trying some new stuff.

Sorry but trying 'something new' doesn't mean removing the heart, the lungs and the liver of battle net.

 

[Doctor-Pepper]

@PurplePoot, comes from a dude with 10k posts and tons of forum icons. Try harder my ass. I dont have 10hours a day for gaming like you

Just red few articles about the demands the shareholders are placing after the fusion with activision (after I watched the cat video from Husky). ANd its FreAKinG me OuT!! If Blizzard dont start resisting, it might become just another "profit first" corporations. Thats would be a shame, cause until now it was like the only multinational company in the world that focused primary on the quality of the product and satisfaction of the client.
No more "we will release the game when the quality is up to the level" no more 7+ years life cycle, no more filled game lobbies years and years after the release.
To this day, Blizzard is the only company that can get me to buy their product in a heartbeat, without any hesitation. I hope it stays that way in the next few years

 

[LordDz]

Just saying:
Steam got no chat channels, and I got over 100 friends on it.

 

[Dark.Revenant]

Just saying:
Steam got no chat channels, and I got over 100 friends on it.

Yes. But Steam doesn't give away your IRL name when you try to add a friend. And Steam has a much better interface. And Steam has a large swath of games available for it.

Unlike the new Battle.net.

 

[Gleeful]

Steam has groups, which from what I've read is similar to chat channels.

I could be wrong, I don't use steam.

 

[PurplePoot]

New stuff is great, but it shouldn't be put in priority over basic features that work. In IM-based chat, there is no way to organize large games without going third-party. Period. There's no refuting that.

Well, seeing as games have a maximum of 16 players and it's unlikely you'll be playing with half that many, it really is easy to organize a large game in the current system (you are aware of party chat, right?). In addition, clans will have chatrooms, and I assume/hope they will allow non-clan members into said chatrooms.

Secondly, in sc2 you have to add people to your friends list to chat with them.

No you don't.

And with the naming system in a mess, even adding friends isn't convenient.

That's because they disabled the other method to get RealID tested because it's a beta, not a free game license.

You basically have to ask for the person's email (or identifier as it was previously) to friend people or find a post-game button that will do it for you.

Which is why identifiers were removed; to make this easier.

All I want to be able to do is look at someones name and either message them or friend them. Why does it have to be any more difficult than that?

At release it almost certainly won't be.

And the map publishing system is even worse than the situation for chat.

Other than the popularity sorting it's pretty nice. After using the new custom game search I appreciate the fact that maps are only listed once, although popularity sort is pretty stupid.

Nor have they addressed the family issue--want to share sc2 with your brother or your son? You will either have to deal with having to use the same ladder ranking or buy another copy of the game.

When you buy software, you are buying a license for one person to use. Why should they support you for not following that?

Not very intuitive. Want to play cross-region? You have to buy another copy of the game. There are plenty of ways to overcome the latency issues, but they just aren't interested.

Actually, we are getting mixed signals on this one. Chris Sigaty said they are planning to work towards this at some point in the future but they have other priorities at this time.

I'm all for adding new things. I love the new units, I love how the micro/macro has played out in melee. I love the editor. But I am not going to sit here and pretend that battle.net works in its new incarnation, because it doesn't.

That's your opinion; I could equally say that I'm not going to pretend that BNet doesn't work in its incarnation, because it does. In fact, I'm provably right and you're provably wrong--perhaps what you meant to say is that it doesn't have the feature list you are looking for?

@PurplePoot, comes from a dude with 10k posts and tons of forum icons. Try harder my ass. I dont have 10hours a day for gaming like you

I don't have ten hours a day for gaming either. In fact, being a university student it's just as likely I have less free time than you do than the opposite. The standard "lol get a life fag" is incredibly old and doesn't help your credibility. 10,218 posts in four years is not at all hard to achieve; I doubt my posts per day is even close to the highest.

Yes. But Steam doesn't give away your IRL name when you try to add a friend.

OH FOR FUCK'S SAKE. How many times do we have to post that that.is.only.for.this.stage.of.the.beta.to.stress.test.RealID before you people clue in? This sort of thing only discredits you.

And Steam has a much better interface.

Steam's interface is terrible.

And Steam has a large swath of games available for it.

I doubt people tend to friend people who don't play the same game(s) though.

--

BNet 2.0 isn't perfectly, but in my opinion it's shaping up to be a lot better than BNet ever was.

 

[Gleeful]

Well, seeing as games have a maximum of 16 players and it's unlikely you'll be playing with half that many, it really is easy to organize a large game in the current system (you are aware of party chat, right?). In addition, clans will have chatrooms, and I assume/hope they will allow non-clan members into said chatrooms.

12 players is very likely. And it's not just large custom games (which for many happened all the time in wc3--ffa's, ww3's, rp's etc), but extends to tournament organization as well. Clans could be as far off as the next expansion so they say, so getting in just basic private chat channel functionality would have been a blessing. Moreover, clan chat rooms alone don't suffice everything you can get of chat channels in general.

And party chat is small and limited comparably.

No you don't.

Well, by all means please enlighten me. And I mean out-of-game chat, not chatting with people in-game or in game lobbies.

That's because they disabled the other method to get RealID tested because it's a beta, not a free game license.

Which is why identifiers were removed; to make this easier.

At release it almost certainly won't be.

The only other method was to provide the full identifier, which was just as bad--and useless now since there are no identifiers. I am hoping that we end up with the same system we have now, only with unique names. But there is no evidence as to what we will actually end up with because blizzard has done very little to communicate. Saying they disabled certain features isn't really comforting, because that could apply to the removal of identifiers as well.

Other than the popularity sorting it's pretty nice. After using the new custom game search I appreciate the fact that maps are only listed once, although popularity sort is pretty stupid.

-No password system for private games means you have to individually invite/keep track of everyone you want in the game.
-No way for players to move between teams on their own, the host has to do it for them.
-No map title screen for joining games means no way to communicate how you want the game to be played before players clog up your game lobby.
-Auto-joining by type means that one player can effectively block players from joining a certain game by idling while the game is hosted. Since players are directed to maps on a first come first serve basis, new hosts won't get any players until the first map is either full or started/canceled.
-If a map-maker deletes his map from the cloud a player has no way of playing it ever again.
-Unique names for published maps means players will sit on blank maps to reserve their own.
-Hosting on the battle.net cloud means unreasonable restrictions on mapping that will always exist.
-The chat lobby in custom games is even smaller than wc3's pitifully small chat box (one line less vertically, significantly smaller horizontally). I can imagine it will be a nightmare for 12 player games.
-Having to scroll to view all the players in 12-player games is annoying.

All that in addition to the popularity problems. Some of these can be worked around, but they all derive from the fact that the system is unintuitive without locally hosting maps as well. It would have made more sense if maps could only be published to the battle.net cloud if they are exceedingly popular or premium. You could still have an enhanced search by type feature, is that really too hard to imagine?

When you buy software, you are buying a license for one person to use. Why should they support you for not following that?

Even in wow, your license grants you to share your account with one other person in your family. There's nothing about not sharing your wc3 with other individuals in the eula either, just that you can't use it on more than one computer. There's even a clause for legally giving away your wc3 to someone else.

Actually, we are getting mixed signals on this one. Chris Sigaty said they are planning to work towards this at some point in the future but they have other priorities at this time.

We are getting mixed signals on everything. They've said something about cross region and chat channels and etc. all in the past, but then Frank Pearce comes in and disputes that. Then bashiok (vaguely, somewhat) says something else. The communication has been really poor, but what I do know is that what's missing isn't going to cut it for release. And having been in every other blizzard beta, I can safely say that this scale of change generally doesn't happen this close to release. If I'm wrong, god be blessed.

That's your opinion; I could equally say that I'm not going to pretend that BNet doesn't work in its incarnation, because it does. In fact, I'm provably right and you're provably wrong--perhaps what you meant to say is that it doesn't have the feature list you are looking for?

That's just being facetious. Battle.net does not have the feature list to accomplish a lot of of things in wc3, or accomplish them as easily. Sorry if I wasn't freaking literal enough for you.

 

[PurplePoot]

Well, by all means please enlighten me. And I mean out-of-game chat, not chatting with people in-game or in game lobbies.

Try right clicking someone's name and clicking "Chat" some time. I hear it works quite well.

The only other method was to provide the full identifier, which was just as bad--and useless now since there are no identifiers.

And they will presumably revert to a system like Warcraft's where you need only provide the account name.

-No password system for private games means you have to individually invite/keep track of everyone you want in the game.

Or just be in a party, which you should be anyways.

-No way for players to move between teams on their own, the host has to do it for them.

That's either a problem or a feature depending on your perspective. A lot of the slot-grabbing in Warcraft games was annoying.

-No map title screen for joining games means no way to communicate how you want the game to be played before players clog up your game lobby.

The custom maps system has some problems, yes, although I am of the camp which believes that game modes are evil anyways.

-Auto-joining by type means that one player can effectively block players from joining a certain game by idling while the game is hosted. Since players are directed to maps on a first come first serve basis, new hosts won't get any players until the first map is either full or started/canceled.

And if this becomes an issue it will presumably be fixed, but there are plenty of AFK hosts and I haven't had any trouble with this.

-If a map-maker deletes his map from the cloud a player has no way of playing it ever again.

Also a bug or a feature depending on your perspective, but local hosting would be nice, sure.

-Unique names for published maps means players will sit on blank maps to reserve their own.

You can only sit five at once, so it isn't really an issue.

-Hosting on the battle.net cloud means unreasonable restrictions on mapping that will always exist.

Such as? You (or your group) criticize Blizzard for being vague and yet do the same thing?

-The chat lobby in custom games is even smaller than wc3's pitifully small chat box (one line less vertically, significantly smaller horizontally). I can imagine it will be a nightmare for 12 player games.

The lobby chat was useless in both games because people spammed it. If people act normally it works fine.

-Having to scroll to view all the players in 12-player games is annoying.

Agreed.

Even in wow, your license grants you to share your account with one other person in your family. There's nothing about not sharing your wc3 with other individuals in the eula either, just that you can't use it on more than one computer. There's even a clause for legally giving away your wc3 to someone else.

And you can legally give your account to someone else.

That's just being facetious. Battle.net does not have the feature list to accomplish a lot of of things in wc3, or accomplish them as easily. Sorry if I wasn't freaking literal enough for you.

Actually, not being literal is a huge problem because it allows you to change what you "meant" later on.

 

[Gleeful]

Try right clicking someone's name and clicking "Chat" some time. I hear it works quite well.

What? You right click someone's name... that's on your friends list.

Or just be in a party, which you should be anyways.

I covered this in the other post but it got cut off.

You can only have six people in a party. Also, you can only invite people to your party who are on your friends list.

That's either a problem or a feature depending on your perspective. A lot of the slot-grabbing in Warcraft games was annoying.

Slot-grabbing? The host still had the power to kick people. If we're really going to be innovative, at least make it standard so players can move around on their own and let the host lock the game and move people at will if he so desires. But having people not be able to choose their own teams is just inconvenient.

The custom maps system has some problems, yes, although I am of the camp which believes that game mods are evil anyways.

wut

Also a bug or a feature depending on your perspective, but local hosting would be nice, sure.

Well, I am of the camp that believes if you publish something you shouldn't be able to dictate whether or not people can play it anymore.

You can only sit five at once, so it isn't really an issue.

Such as? You (or your group) criticize Blizzard for being vague and yet do the same thing?

Sorry, I presumed everyone here already knows the restrictions. 20mb cap on all maps, five maps only. That might be increased, but since we're using blizzard's bandwidth a cap will always exist. Why should I sacrifice that freedom for a system that arguably has very few advantages?

The lobby chat was useless in both games because people spammed it. If people act normally it works fine.

Okay? More of this illogical spam stuff, do you understand that some people use these features for things other than public means? If I am organizing a big game with people I know, I want a chat I can easily talk in without having to constantly scroll down. what would really work nice is if the chat was a fully expandable frame and then translucent.