I Hope Battle.Net Isn't As Bad As This Guy Is Making It Sound

B

blank_czech

New member
Mar 16, 2008
1,375
15
0
Still bored, but I thought this was interesting.

From The Ghetto Battle.net 2.0: The Antithesis of Consumer Confidence

Battle.net 2.0: The Antithesis of Consumer Confidence

Note A: This entry reflects a “current event”. Things change. So if I’m ranting that Pac-Man represents the technological heights of Reagan’s America, keep an open mind.

Note B: Edited for general clarity. This article is in beta about a beta. It takes time. Relax.

I’m late to the Battle.net 2.0 Hate Party, but I brought a keg, so here goes.

I don’t get angry about video games. Passionate? Yeah, it’s pathetic. But no, not angry. Game developers are people, too. They got bills to pay. But Battle.net 2.0 makes me angry.

Starcraft II is excellence. It’s sensational. Dustin Browder knew this game was his legacy and his squad delivered. And it’s a fucking shame people are going to turn on this product for things Browder has no control over. Right now, the Battle.net Forums look like the Battle of the Somme and Starcraft fan site TeamLiquid is trying to disown the game. The internet has shat a brick. What the hell happened?

I wasn’t around for the “Atari owns the industry” days. But in my lifetime, nothing tops Activision-Blizzard, a corporate culture whose roots lie in four developers who escaped Atari’s corporate culture. I have never seen one company try so hard to tell me this is the product I want.

Battle.net 2.0 is supposed to be the future of online gaming. Instead, it is the antithesis of consumer confidence, a combination of corporate suits who don’t play video games and game designers who can’t do damage control.

Fine, tell me it’s wrong to assume an Activision corporate culture would impact its corporate partner. You know, where the President of Blizzard Entertainment answers directly to Thomas Tippl, an executive who answers to Activision C.E.O. Bobby Kotick. The Bobby Kotick who disowned projects that lacked “the potential to be exploited every year on every platform with clear sequel potential”. The Bobby Kotick who stated he wants to “take the fun out of making video games.” Or you can see what happens when an online gaming service is not a game design decision.

—

Economics is consumer confidence. People don’t buy products. They buy confidence a product will bring utility or enjoyment to the user. That’s why the success of sequels reflect on their predecessor, where Guitar Hero III is the best-selling game in the series and Modern Warfare 2 outguns Call of Duty 4 on a two-to-one basis.

Starcraft II is a marketing nightmare. It is the sequel to a twelve-year-old computer game, a beacon in the forgotten era of Deus Ex and Baldur’s Gate. Why forgotten? Computer gaming sucks ass. If you aren’t playing Modern Warfare 2 (latest in a series popularized on computers) on your X-Box 360 (manufactured by the producer of Windows) on X-Box Live (Battle.net, Yahoo! Games, The Zone, etc.), you’re a fucking pussy. Unless you play World of Warcraft, the skinner box that shares nothing in common with Starcraft...
Click to expand...
That's just the first part, I was going to paste the entire article, but it's fairly long, but a good read. Reminded me why I wasn't going to buy SC2 on the day it came out.
 


Servers are so fucking shitty. Also what they should've done with SC maps was make the maps random and units start at random places in the map each time instead of the same shit. That's why the Ages Of games are one of the best RTS out there. It's a different experience each time
 
Meh just a bunch of cry babiess recruiting more cry babieswho don't understand development and want to cry on each others mushy man boobs.
 
.Hack said:
Servers are so fucking shitty. Also what they should've done with SC maps was make the maps random and units start at random places in the map each time instead of the same shit. That's why the Ages Of games are one of the best RTS out there. It's a different experience each time
Click to expand...

Every little bit of the map is key for balance in SC - a random map would fuck everything up.

I can't see why people whine about this game so much. It's fucking awesome and everything I would expect SC 2 would be. My guess is they just get owned most of the time and don't really get the complexities that come out of what appears to be a simple game.

You don't need a bunch of random units no one uses to make a game good.
 
miketpowell said:
Every little bit of the map is key for balance in SC - a random map would fuck everything up.

I can't see why people whine about this game so much. It's fucking awesome and everything I would expect SC 2 would be. My guess is they just get owned most of the time and don't really get the complexities that come out of what appears to be a simple game.

You don't need a bunch of random units no one uses to make a game good.
Click to expand...


I completely agree, it is by far a complex game, i've been playing SC since the original release and SC2 close to the initial beta release. Don't bitch about a game just because you don't understand it!
 
The new (albeit fully optional) Real ID system with Battle.net is insane. Yeah, I really want random people I game with on the net to know my real name, what I'm playing, when I'm playing it, etc just so we can chat.

Battle.net Real ID

It's turning into facebook with swords haha.
 
The custom games add a huge amount of replay value to the game. The 1v1...4v4 does get a little old after a while. Turret defense, impossible maps, phantom, ect I could play everyday.

Also what is going to suck is if Bnet doesn't take hackers seriously or they just give up like they have in SC1.
 
Absolutely serious. It's more unit to control now easily, plus zerlings seems much faster than sc1, and this roaches so early with already that poison stuff, it was pretty easy for me in some games I played so far and I am no pro at all. Oh and forgot about quenss with larva also very early.

IdRa probably wins only on that lol, if not, my comrad WhiteRa just beat his ass with Tosses!!!!
 
seolinker said:
Absolutely serious. It's more unit to control now easily, plus zerlings seems much faster than sc1, and this roaches so early with already that poison stuff, it was pretty easy for me in some games I played so far and I am no pro at all. Oh and forgot about quenss with larva also very early.

IdRa probably wins only on that lol, if not, my comrad WhiteRa just beat his ass with Tosses!!!!
Click to expand...

Obviously you've been playing newbs, roaches aren't hard to overcome if you actually scout and know what your enemy is playing. Anyone who has tried mass roaching me has gotten raped, no matter what race I am. I will admit in the very beginning of beta they were pretty rigged, but this is beta, and by time SC2 is officially released it should be well balanced. I'm part in the wrong though as well, we're sitting here talking about a game being unfair when it's still in beta lol.
 
miketpowell said:
Every little bit of the map is key for balance in SC - a random map would fuck everything up.

I can't see why people whine about this game so much. It's fucking awesome and everything I would expect SC 2 would be. My guess is they just get owned most of the time and don't really get the complexities that come out of what appears to be a simple game.

You don't need a bunch of random units no one uses to make a game good.
Click to expand...

Thing is after time. You get use to all the strategies since the maps are always in the same place and people do the same shit. It gets really repetitive too nigglet
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom