Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Starcraft II, the game gamers have been waiting 12 years for, has been ruined by BattleNet 2.0   (the-ghetto.org) divider line
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

14492 clicks; posted to Fandom » on 09 Jun 2010 at 2:15 PM (11 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



425 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2010-06-09 1:11:21 PM  
Wow, I wish I had two hours to read that rant.
 
2010-06-09 1:14:56 PM  
I'm not reading that, but it got ruined when they decided you have to purchase three copies to get the whole campaign.
 
2010-06-09 1:19:32 PM  

GAT_00: I'm not reading that, but it got ruined when they decided you have to purchase three copies to get the whole campaign.


this.

also - Starcraft II is just Starcraft with better graphics. Do NOT understand the hype at all.
 
2010-06-09 1:21:06 PM  
4,576 words about Starcraft? What am I, Korean?

I read the first thousand or so and I still have no idea what the problem is. Mr. Sh*tty internet writer, it's called an "introduction", and you're supposed to summarize your main points in it so readers know whether they want to read on.
 
2010-06-09 1:24:01 PM  
Blizzard has forgotten the face of it's father.

They have been disconnected from their community since early in TBC for WoW. Basically when it got bought by Vivendi.

It's really sad because Blizzard has put out some phenomenal games and now it's more activision than Blizzard.
 
2010-06-09 1:25:06 PM  

big_pth: Wow, I wish I had two hours to read that rant.


basically, it boils down to Activision-Blizzard making several very bad game design decisions. essentially, the corporate overlord types told the game designers to encode the game to maximize potential profits and sacrificed key game elements that the players really liked in the first game.

Which is something I can agree with. Warcraft was getting pretty bad by the time I quit. game balance was out the window, it was becoming impossible to maintain a good guild structure, content was repetitive, hackers had evolved several very effective strategies to steal accounts and there was a very apparent lack of customer service from blizzard. the game had become less about organizing/running/maintaining a great community of guild members and more about 'oo! shiny happy horsie I bought off the store for $25!'

all of which is something activision/blizzard can fix. I mean, they're not entirely without a couple of very bankable products. it's just that the company seems to be moving away from making games people want to play and more towards making games that work according to corporate quarterly earnings goals. they're paranoid about 'losing control' and letting people cut loose and have fun...which is rather the point of playing a game in the first place.
 
2010-06-09 1:26:25 PM  

GAT_00: I'm not reading that, but it got ruined when they decided you have to purchase three copies to get the whole campaign.


I don't look at it like that. Each campaign is now going to be the length of all three campaigns in the original SC. Instead of 9-10 missions for Terran equating to maybe 8 or so hours of gameplay, you're now going to get 27 (I think 27 all together) missions which will flesh out to the playtime of the entirety of SC1.
 
2010-06-09 1:27:17 PM  
I read far enough to get that there is no LAN feature, which sucks ass. I read far enough to see that there is no chat. I got bogged down at that point, and had an uncharacteristic TL;DR moment.

Is there anything else major that I missed?

Also, is this the same system that is going to be used for Diablo 3?

Is online play still free through battle.net?
 
2010-06-09 1:28:00 PM  
Are there any DotA players on Fark?
 
2010-06-09 1:28:39 PM  

Weaver95: the game had become less about organizing/running/maintaining a great community of guild members and more about 'oo! shiny happy horsie I bought off the store for $25!'


Don't forget remote auction house (for extra $$) and now possibly buying extra character slots. It's getting bad.
 
2010-06-09 1:28:55 PM  
I got tired of reading that disjointed rant, but here are the main problems SC2 actually has right now:

1) No LAN, which they claim is because BattleNet is a better experience. Bzzzt. It's obviously to try to stamp out cracked gameplay, but will only serve to hamper the experiences of legit players that bought the game. LAN was one of the best parts of SC2. Now you require an internet connection. Which brings me to

2) You require an internet connection to play single player. Yeah. You have to do a one-off sign-in to the BattleNet servers just to do anything offline, again to try to stamp out cracked games.

3) BattleNet is laggy. Have fun playing a 4v4 that lasts more than 4 minutes, because a couple dozen units for each player and the game looks like a greenlit slideshow.

4) The Activision-induced (I suspect) three game release. Sure you can play multiplayer from the get go, and the single player campaign for each race is said to be as long as all three campaigns from the original game, but this is pretty obviously a money-making ploy. Add in the $100 collector's edition and you can see who's running the show at Blizzard now. We've gone from free BattleNet (1.0) to this.

5) Broken voice chat. Anyone that's played WoW shouldn't be surprised about this. I know it's still Beta but you'd think they would have enough money to just buy Ventrillo or something.

SC2 is definitely a fun game and is as tactically and strategically exciting and diverse as the original. It's not the same game, but it plays just as well. But all these problems (and more I probably can't think of right now) are going to be a mess.
 
2010-06-09 1:30:02 PM  

Merkin For The Weekend: Also, is this the same system that is going to be used for Diablo 3?


Yes, and WoW has already switched over too. Basically if your friend is playing a blizzard game, you'll know.
 
2010-06-09 1:30:29 PM  

Merkin For The Weekend: I read far enough to get that there is no LAN feature, which sucks ass. I read far enough to see that there is no chat. I got bogged down at that point, and had an uncharacteristic TL;DR moment.

Is there anything else major that I missed?

Also, is this the same system that is going to be used for Diablo 3?


Not sure if this is what Diablo 3 will use but I would guess yes. They're planning to implement this across all their games, including WoW.

Is online play still free through battle.net?

And yes it's still free.


I've been playing the beta alot the past few months and I honestly didn't find the lack of chat rooms to be any sort of problem. A minor annoyance maybe. But they have so many ways of adding friends and tracking down past players that I really don't think it's that big of an issue. Could the whole thing be simplified with a chat room? Probably, but overall I don't think it's anywhere near as much of a end-all problem as people are making it out to be.
 
2010-06-09 1:30:41 PM  

benlonghair: Blizzard has forgotten the face of it's father.

They have been disconnected from their community since early in TBC for WoW. Basically when it got bought by Vivendi.

It's really sad because Blizzard has put out some phenomenal games and now it's more activision than Blizzard.


yup, I'd agree - they've put out some utterly amazing games. And even some of the end game content from WoW is still great. But they're bleeding out long term players like myself. And the reasons are all the same...when blizzard watered down content so that every idiot with a macro can get into it, people (and guilds) looking for a challenge will go elsewhere. it IS why we form top tier guilds after all. For the challenge. I still remember with pride the day I finished my Priest class quest for my class epic...and that was back when the level cap was 60 and Scholomance was a 10 man instance.
 
2010-06-09 1:30:55 PM  
It's quite a good read if you have time.
 
2010-06-09 1:32:23 PM  
i dont understand this rant really. tho i realize i'm not the intended target for the rant i wanted to try to at least get a grip on it as a whole, but i really dont get it.

i guess i dont game enough.
 
2010-06-09 1:32:28 PM  
oh and...

6) Achievement system. They threw in a slapdash achievement system for character portraits, icons, etc. like every other game that seems to need to find a forced reason for people to play it often. I fully expect paid DLC-type stuff like custom skins, colors, maps, etc. - anything to make another buck.
 
2010-06-09 1:33:11 PM  

Quasar: 2) You require an internet connection to play single player. Yeah. You have to do a one-off sign-in to the BattleNet servers just to do anything offline, again to try to stamp out cracked games.


Well, at least everybody is in the same boat. You know, except for people with cracked copies, because they remove such checks.
 
2010-06-09 1:33:19 PM  

bradleynash: Starcraft II is just Starcraft with better graphics


Pretty much, but it's still pretty freaking fun.
 
2010-06-09 1:33:55 PM  

Tresser: i dont understand this rant really. tho i realize i'm not the intended target for the rant i wanted to try to at least get a grip on it as a whole, but i really dont get it.

i guess i dont game enough.


1. game was good.
2. corporate suits took out some good stuff, put in stuff that makes them money.
3. game not so good now.
4. profit.
 
2010-06-09 1:34:04 PM  
If it weren't for Valve Software, I probably wouldn't even be a video game player anymore.
 
2010-06-09 1:34:46 PM  

Quasar: oh and...

6) Achievement system. They threw in a slapdash achievement system for character portraits, icons, etc. like every other game that seems to need to find a forced reason for people to play it often. I fully expect paid DLC-type stuff like custom skins, colors, maps, etc. - anything to make another buck.


Buy zerglings for 1 cent a piece without having to wait for larvae to free up.
 
2010-06-09 1:35:14 PM  

Kublai Khan: Quasar: 2) You require an internet connection to play single player. Yeah. You have to do a one-off sign-in to the BattleNet servers just to do anything offline, again to try to stamp out cracked games.

Well, at least everybody is in the same boat. You know, except for people with cracked copies, because they remove such checks.


that's the weird part - the way things work now you actually get a better game play experience if you pirate the game than if you do the right thing and buy the regular/approved copy.
 
2010-06-09 1:36:46 PM  

Weaver95: when blizzard watered down content so that every idiot with a macro can get into it


Hey, I was an idiot with a macro from Kara until Illidan. But I also pumped out top DPS in the guild with my hunter.

Weaver95: I still remember with pride the day I finished my Priest class quest for my class epic


... Damn it, I was gonna link my Feat of Strength for my Rhok'delar but apparently there isn't one. WTF. THAT was epic. Not ToTC. Never went too far in ICC but Purticide seemed like a good fight.
 
2010-06-09 1:38:30 PM  

I Said: It's quite a good read if you have time.


No it's not. It's a whiny biatch rant and he doesn't even understand how to get to the farking point.
 
2010-06-09 1:38:59 PM  

benlonghair: Weaver95: when blizzard watered down content so that every idiot with a macro can get into it

Hey, I was an idiot with a macro from Kara until Illidan. But I also pumped out top DPS in the guild with my hunter.


pssh. hunters. if you AREN'T putting out massive DPS with your hunter, then you're either drunk or AFK. want a challenge? play a healer. Want to go completely mad? Be the healing officer in a top tier raid guild.

I lasted five years.
 
2010-06-09 1:46:34 PM  
upload.wikimedia.orgView Full Size


What the author might look like.
 
2010-06-09 1:49:13 PM  
this made me lol tho:

Facebook is human hypocrisy. Remember what the internet was? A gathering site for outcasts? A gateway for wasting time on Everquest? The people who bashed the internet are now playing Farmville on Facebook, the social networking site where you can express your individuality by copy-pasting funny pictures someone else created.


dude doesnt get around much....
 
2010-06-09 1:49:22 PM  

Quasar: 1) No LAN, which they claim is because BattleNet is a better experience. Bzzzt. It's obviously to try to stamp out cracked gameplay, but will only serve to hamper the experiences of legit players that bought the game. LAN was one of the best parts of SC2.


Ridiculous.
Makes me not even want it. I've spent hours playing SC and WC3 over LAN with buddies, usually against computer opponents.
 
2010-06-09 1:54:03 PM  

Lando Lincoln: If it weren't for Valve Software, I probably wouldn't even be a video game player anymore.


This.

And the indie publishers.

Innovation isn't happening at the AAA's anymore, unless you count innovative DRM.
 
2010-06-09 1:54:39 PM  

Weaver95: I still remember with pride the day I finished my Priest class quest for my class epic...and that was back when the level cap was 60 and Scholomance was a 10 man instance.


Good times. I had a bunch of friends cheering me on, pots, etc. Heart racing, desperately trying to heal/survive.

My deactivated account still has my Benediction sitting in the bank.
 
2010-06-09 1:55:05 PM  
Is there any chance they put LAN back in somehow when their piracy issues are addressed? Will a 3rd party make a LAN workaround?

I've been waiting for this game for a long time, timing the purchase of my next computer to coincide with SC2's release of July 27th.

Now I'm wondering if I should even bother.
 
2010-06-09 2:01:39 PM  
I tried reading through that. I made it to the 117th paragraph. And I have no idea what he is saying or trying to say.
 
2010-06-09 2:03:18 PM  

Weaver95: want a challenge? play a healer.


Yes I do want a challenge. But being screamed at because the DPS can't beat the enrage or because the tank doesn't understand the concept of defensive cooldowns is not my idea of a challenge.

Weaver95: Be the healing officer in a top tier raid guild.


Thanks anyway, but I've already got a spork to gouge my eyes out. I apped to a couple top end guilds the last time I was in search of a new server for my main. Even putting out 10% more damage than my gear was capable of didn't get me in, so I said screw it, I'll play with scrubs.

Then Archimonde (or, more correctly the mouthbreathers in my guild and leadership without testicular fortitude) killed raiding for me. Which is OK.
 
2010-06-09 2:10:28 PM  
Got into the beta a while back, went back to playing Dawn of War 2 within a week.
 
2010-06-09 2:18:52 PM  
It's being setup with the infrastructure for a pay-to-play model already built-in.

LAN support wasn't removed (note: REMOVED not simply "not added") to combat piracy, it's to prevent the existence of tourneys or e-sports with Blizzard getting a cut.
 
2010-06-09 2:19:07 PM  

bradleynash: GAT_00: I'm not reading that, but it got ruined when they decided you have to purchase three copies to get the whole campaign.

this.

also - Starcraft II is just Starcraft with better graphics. Do NOT understand the hype at all.


And not even functionally better. Hell, you can't even zoom out. It's a very fun game, but come on.
 
2010-06-09 2:20:02 PM  
Quasar: 2) You require an internet connection to play single player. Yeah. You have to do a one-off sign-in to the BattleNet servers just to do anything offline, again to try to stamp out cracked games.

I'm not disbelieving you, but do you have a source on this? I knew about no LAN, but I'll be pretty annoyed if I have to have an internet connection to play a single player game.
 
2010-06-09 2:20:36 PM  
Willy hears ya, Willy don't care
 
2010-06-09 2:23:28 PM  

YouWinAgainGravity: Quasar: 2) You require an internet connection to play single player. Yeah. You have to do a one-off sign-in to the BattleNet servers just to do anything offline, again to try to stamp out cracked games.

I'm not disbelieving you, but do you have a source on this? I knew about no LAN, but I'll be pretty annoyed if I have to have an internet connection to play a single player game.


Theoretically it's going to be like Steam's DRM. You need to connect to BattleNet to install, after that you're free.

Theoretically.
 
2010-06-09 2:25:36 PM  
netweavr: Theoretically it's going to be like Steam's DRM. You need to connect to BattleNet to install, after that you're free.

Theoretically.


Ah. That's still annoying but a one-time thing is still a bit bearable.
 
2010-06-09 2:27:05 PM  

YouWinAgainGravity: netweavr: Theoretically it's going to be like Steam's DRM. You need to connect to BattleNet to install, after that you're free.

Theoretically.

Ah. That's still annoying but a one-time thing is still a bit bearable.


That makes me feel a little bit better. Thanks.
 
2010-06-09 2:30:15 PM  

netweavr: LAN support wasn't removed (note: REMOVED not simply "not added") to combat piracy, it's to prevent the existence of tourneys or e-sports with Blizzard getting a cut.


Star Craft 1 wouldn't have been so insanely popular (and Star Craft 2 would not be so insanely anticipated) if Star Craft 1 did not have LAN support. So Blizzard can go choke on a dick if they remove LAN support so they can cash in on tourneys.

And this whole idea of me buying three games so I can play all three races makes me want to cock punch them a second time. I never really got into the Star Craft multi-player thing, so I really enjoyed playing single-player as the three races. But I never was super-crazy about the game, so once I finished the campaigns, I was done. I thought all three campaigns were just the right length.

But now, if I want to play the three races, I have to pay 3x the money with 3x the campaign lengths? That sounds like they threw in a shiat-load of boring ass campaign maps just to fill up space. Fark them right in the ass.
 
2010-06-09 2:32:21 PM  
Lando Lincoln: But now, if I want to play the three races, I have to pay 3x the money with 3x the campaign lengths? That sounds like they threw in a shiat-load of boring ass campaign maps just to fill up space. Fark them right in the ass.

My understanding is that you can play the 3 races in multiplayer and stand-alone maps by buying just 1 game. I believe it's just the campaign that's been split across 3 games.
 
2010-06-09 2:32:24 PM  
Here's the low-down. Game developers do not care about you after you have bought their game. No matter how much people biatch and moan, all they have to do is have some good marketing and time their release and people will buy it in droves. Now you add a monthly payment to the deal and they have some incentive to keep customers. You say pay-to-play and subscriptions are a bad thing, but I think they give some responsibility to developers to improve on their product. We face the same thing in our industry. Some of our competitors are terrible at what they do, but they have great marketing and some great products. Their service is absolutely shiat and we pick up many of our customers dissatisfied with our competitors. They stuff they get away with is outrageous, and it makes me wonder how they are still in business? We on the other hand started off as a services company, but MOST PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO PAY FOR THE SERVICE. Well, you get what you farking pay for.

The sad thing about this however is they can STILL get by with lousy decisions and reluctance because the gaming industry is a monopoly dominated by corporate giants. The amount of capital and time it takes to make a decent product limits competition, limiting competition limits choices, limiting your choices leaves you with 2 options A.) Keep playing the game that is mildly fun despite your frustrations B.) Don't play or pay for the game at all. Now, those aren't very good options. I personally would like an option C.) Don't play or pay for the game and play something else. Piracy has sent the wrong message to developers. The message being received is "Hey these people obviously want my product they just don't want to pay for it." By and large, this is true but there are an overwhelming amount of people that think the product is OVERVALUED and don't want to put money into the coffers of corrupt and retarded companies.

I have said this all along that gaming has declined rapidly, it isn't any secret. Fark EA and fark Activision (especially Kotick), but most importantly fark all those people that allow this shiat to continue by buying into this crap. Tournament play, HardCore gaming principles and ideas will never be addressed fully, that isn't where the money is. Until game design allows for more competition by being quicker and cheaper, you are stuck with what you have now. It will only get worse I'm afraid as there are more and more micro-transactions and developers/publishers get away with more. Personally instead of making new platforms with arbitrarily better graphics, at this point I think they need to invest in streamlining what we have currently that would benefit everyone the most.
 
2010-06-09 2:32:46 PM  
upload.wikimedia.orgView Full Size


Everything you could want for a "Starcraft 2", and it came out years ago. All the screenshots I've seen of Starcraft 2 look just like that little video at the end of Warcraft 3 were they laid Starcraft skins on the Warcraft models, but prettier. Will I buy Starcraft 2? Unless the reviewers tank it then yes. Do I understand the hype? No.
 
2010-06-09 2:32:59 PM  
Been in the beta for a couple months, gonna be passing this up. As other have said, it's SC1 with prettier graphics.
 
2010-06-09 2:34:02 PM  

the money is in the banana stand: Game developers do not care about you after you have bought their game.


Yes, they do. Developers care.

Corporations don't.
 
2010-06-09 2:35:08 PM  
Okay well I've played over 1000 games of SC2 Beta, ranked top Plat/Diamond every reset in 1v1 and 2v2 so I'll try to address some of the main issues.

First, the game is awesome. It's a huge advancement over SC1, which I was also a big fan of. Much of the BS has been automated, and while they added a little more management in the macro game by having to call down mules, scans, use queens, or chronoboost, this element really offsets the old, "go back to the base every 15s to check your workers."

LAN - This is an unfounded complaint about the game made by people who just want to pirate it. The 'lag' on bnet is minimal to none in ladder games, with the exception of the day after patch day, and sometimes maintanence. If you have a bunch of SC2 buddies who want to play, you just have to have a legit copy and there's no problem playing the exact same way you would have played LAN before. This isn't 1995 anymore, lag issues are incredibly minimal.

No Chat Channels - This is a big issue. The Bliz execs actually said they didn't think people really wanted chat channels. So about five-thousand replies were posted on the forums saying otherwise. This is something they will likely change as they realize they were totally wrong.

No unique ID - This is related to the chat channels as now there's no way to even search for players. You can't look people up or check their record unless they were just in one of your games. To assume that people will find eachother solely based on being in the same game is so asinine that it's still hard for me to believe it will remain like this. I lost every beta friend I had because I didn't have any of their email addresses, which is what is required now if you want to add a friend. Blizzard dropped the ball on this one big time.

Those are the main issues people are dealing with right now. Hopefully they'll fix them before the release.
 
2010-06-09 2:37:14 PM  
I'll still probabaly sink 5,000 hours into Diablo III, if my devotion to II is any indication.
 
Displayed 50 of 425 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.