I dont like the tick to "expand and show hosted games". Whats the point of that?. If I click join, I just want to join any available game. Nobody will join lesser filled games then. The current system automatically places you well.
Private games with friends is already available through invite only, So password protected games are also irrelevant.
Oh, the real reason for this, and it oddly isn't in the photoshopped images, is for lobby names. We NEED lobby names. When I release my RPG, it's going to be a nightmare when people are wanting to play level 20+ only and meanwhile level 1's are joining the game. There's no way for me to deal with this as a map maker other than make several game-modes for each level bracket, but then id have like 6 maps on the list at once which is just dumb.
So yeah, expandable game list to show host-chosen lobby names.
I really don't think you are ever going to get custom lobby names to be honest, I mean blizzard is already banning maps for swear words, having lobby names is just another thing they have to police.
This is why I put game modes in the expanded list too, you could always have a Level 20+ Only game mode for example.
I know lobby names can be really useful and would be good, it's just that people always abuse them, swear in them, advertise website etc in them. If they aren't going to allow it then we should be able to display per lobby settings or something separate to mode.
I posted this same post on the relevant topic on the official forums, but figured I'd also post it here in hopes of having a higher chance of KratsAU seeing it, and for he sake of the posters here who haven't checked the official forum.
You keep saying you don't think they'll put in custom server names, but I have a couple ideas on how this really could work.
1.Word Filter - They already have a filter on published maps, why not just take the same filter, and run custom map names through it? As for filter avoidances like spacing words out or using symbols, you could use #2.
2.Suspend/Report System - People can report maps with names that are either advertisement spam(which, due to the fact that you have to have a code-activated account to get onto B.net, I think that advertisement spam is a very remote fear) or avoid the filter in some way. If a single server is reported, say, 3 times, the user gets a 24 ban on hosting and can only join maps others host. If this happens 3 in a 2 week period, they get a 1 week hosting ban, or something along those lines. EDIT: I know Blizzard wouldn't like leaving this in players' hands, but we don't want to see advertisements or offensive names either, and if we see an ad or filter avoidance and reporting them is just a right and a left click away, I think enough players will take the initiative to make a difference.
Due to the way you set up the image for checking individual servers, the host would have no reason to include the map name in the title, therefore cutting down on the character limit Blizzard would implement on server titles. They could put a 10 character limit on server names, and because you have to click on the map name to even see the server, people still know what options are being chosen and what the map is. For searching specific servers, it wouldn't be hard to search the map name, then from there look through the server listing.
I hope my ideas have been helpful. I have been against the popularity system 100% since I saw it, but reading through your thread and seeing what the system could be like with some modding gives me renewed hope for Bnet 2.0.
EDIT:Also, a worry of mine as to game type sorting is that letting the author input the game type leads to infinitely redundant categories. (example: TD, Tower Defense, Turret Defense, etc...) If Blizzard were to only allow preset categories, it wouldn't allow for the flexibility that original maps would require. If theres a Hero Arena with strong RPG or TD elements to it, the author would be torn as to which category to select. Allowing the author to select multiple categories to put the map into would create it's own problems, with authors selecting every category to increase exposure.
So maybe a preset list of game types, with the author being able to list their map as only 2 game types, with there being an 'Original' or 'Unique' category for authors with especially creative maps. To use one of the above examples of original maps, the author could put Hero Arena - Original.
Yeah I'm not saying a naming system is impossible, and they could filter words and use a report system (I mean they already have that built in), but it is more work for them at the end of the day, both to create and maintain the filters etc. (Kind of like when you see MMO's try and combat gold spam).
But honestly, if they did allow it in some form I think it would be great, I just don't think they will. If they prove me wrong then I will be very glad ;)
Honestly I think having popularity AND ratings AND favorites AND Number of games hosted clutters things up way too much and won't do that much to improve battlenet.
In my opinion, one change that needs to happen is that maps need to be divided into several categories and the list of games needs to be split into several lists. So when a player wants to join a game, rather than having all maps in a single list, they have to choose from a list of game categories such as Tower Defence, Tug, RPG, DOTA, Footman wars, first person shooter, turn based games, etc. and an Other category for games that do not fit under any of the other categories. Blizzard can do this in two ways. They could make it so that mapmakers have to choose from a list rather than have to input a string for the game category. Alternatively, they could make it so that the mapmaker has to input a string (like they do now) and if the mapmaker's string matches the name of one of blizzard's game categories then it goes in that list, otherwise it goes into the other list. This will make it significantly easiest for players to find the types of maps they want to play and as a result, more maps will be played. Also, it will prevent battlenet from being favorable to certain game types (because right now it is highly favorable to TDs and Tug games.
A second change that will improve battlenet is the option to see hosted games (and the titles of these games). I understand that the WC3 system had its disadvantages (it was annoying to have to search through all hosted games to find the game you want), but it also advantages (namely players could specify the mode of the map such as 4v4 or APEM) and some maps can only function properly if players can specify the game mode before it starts. So why not use the best of both systems and make it so that a player has to choose from a list of maps, like they do now (of course preferably subdivided into categories), and then the player can still join the game using the join game button like they do now, however give the player an additional button called 'show hosted games' and if a player clicks on that button they are immediately directed to a list of all games hosted of that map. Then players would be able to both find the map they want and see the names of the games hosted to find the game mode they want to join.
I'm sad to see all the negative responses on the Battle.net forums. Everyone seems to hate the popularity system on battle.net, but have no faith in changing it whatsoever. "It won't happen," is their response, instead of trying. It's really sad. :(
Yeah it's just easier for people to whine and not put any effort in to supporting something. Human nature I guess.
It's also in our human nature not to click on that shiny Search button and see by ourselves how many threads full of suggestions were created since July, isn't it? Shame Beta forums were taken down, because you could find a lot more there and this very system was proposed dozens of times already in the past months.
My RPG example kind of shows why that isn't really viable. I can't predict that people might want to play 'level 20+ only' or 'X Boss run' unless I make like 100 game variants. Then my RPG would be the only thing all over the popularity list.
Yeah I'm not saying a naming system is impossible, and they could filter words and use a report system (I mean they already have that built in), but it is more work for them at the end of the day, both to create and maintain the filters etc. (Kind of like when you see MMO's try and combat gold spam).
But honestly, if they did allow it in some form I think it would be great, I just don't think they will. If they prove me wrong then I will be very glad ;)
Wouldn't be more work for them if they didn't feel the need to micro-manage and control us. I mean, we survived for over a decade dealing with custom lobby names. We didn't drop over and die, or sue blizzard every time we saw swear words or ads in the names. It being more work for blizzard isn't an excuse not to do something. They CHOSE to go all big brother on us, they CHOSE to micro-manage what we can see. So they can deal with the consequences. If it's too much work, here's an idea, stop babysitting us.
So yeah, custom lobby names would be nice, just put some simple safe-guards like world filters and a report system and be done with it. Blizzard chose to micro-manage our shit, so they can deal with policing it. But we NEED lobby names, there's simply no other way to relay various game-modes on maps. You can't do categories, or anything, as it gets too conviluted. The only way we'll ever see game-modes work is with lobby names, so it is a REQUIREMENT and Blizzard just needs to deal with it, or stop being Big Brother.
They wouldn't have to if people didn't abuse the system. I don't particulary want to see lists of advertising and website spam in my game list. The only advantage of having custom names is to specify the current game parameters etc, so if they wont let us name our games there is definitely other stuff they can do.
But yeah they can use filters and regex to stop people putting in websites, but people just start using all sorts of dodgey stuff to get around it, so at the end of the day it still is more work for them. Just depends if they want to go that way or not.
While I think it overall would be better, I also think it's possible to have a great list without them.
I don't like to see random advertising either, but you know what I did? I kept scrolling up the list. The people who let that kind of shit offend them are the problem. Having people abuse the naming system was -NEVER- an issue, ever. You saw a name you didn't like? Just keep on walking. Overly sensitive people are the downfall of society.
But regardless, what you or I think is irrelevant, it's a REQUIREMENT. There's simply no other way to handle multiple game-modes. You can't put categories or something, since the map maker would have to specifically publish maps for every possible game-mode. There's simply no way to handle them without lobby names, people need the ability to just host and go "all random, easy mod, some other bullshit". And then especially for RPG's where game-modes aren't even official, just players making up their own game-modes such as "lvl 20+ only".
So yeah, while other things can be made to work with Blizzard's shitty, overly controlling system, this isn't one of them. Because you can't expect ANYONE to be able to predict every possible thing players will want. You can't expect map makers to make official game-modes for every possible variation, nor blizzard to implement special lobbies for every possible variant. It's unrealistic and outright impossible. So the only option is to leave it up to the players.
Now if only Blizzard would get their heads out of their asses and leave the ENTIRE system in the hands of the players, like it's been for the past decade, all these ideas and walking on egg-shells to suit Blizzard's nazi-ism would be unnecessary.
I love the +/- thing where it shows whos hosting and how many players. Ammount of games and favorites and ratings is a good idea but the way you portrayed it looks messy. But I LOVE this! :)
I made quite a long post before so maybe the information was lost, so I'll repeat.
Advertisement spam in SC2 won't happen, and if it does, report, report, report, and the advertiser loses their account, and the $60 they paid for the game, its that simple. Now that you don't find key's laying around for sc2 like you did wc3, chances are we won't see ad spam. If we do, we can report the account and after enough reports, it could theoretically get flagged for blizzard to take a look at personally, or for them to be autobanned. It plagued warcraft 3 in later years, but it won't plague sc2. EDIT: Oh, and for every account Blizz bans for ad spamming, they made $60, and that $60 isn't using up server space. So if any of it does happen, even with cost of employees including, Blizz is actually profiting from their attempts at ad spamming.
I agree with Colt, overly sensitive people need to stfu, get tougher skin, and get over it, but it's irrelevant here for the above reasons.
As another example of why game types won't work, I'm working on rebuilding Wintermaul Wars from wc3. I plan to eventually put in game modes. If you are a WMW Tournament vet, you'll know what I mean. Greed increases gold income speed, hyperspeed makes units move faster for a more difficult game, superspeed allows unlimited sending of units at the other team if you have the $, again for higher difficulty, and lifesteal is self-explanatory and leads to longer games with more tug-of-war. I always hosted that game and would generally go with greed and lifesteal enabled. With a game type system, I'd have to submit the map with greed enabled alone, and in every combination with the other game modes. Or, I can host, put Greed&Lifesteal in the name, and Blizzards precious server space is conserved, and I still get my game modes without making it unnecessarily complicated.
I agree with Colt, overly sensitive people need to stfu, get tougher skin, and get over it, but it's irrelevant here for the above reasons.
The people that have a problem with it could say the exact same thing to you.
Anyhow, you guys are completely missing the point, there is only 1 advantage to custom names, and that's the ability to show game parameters. If blizzard decides they don't want custom names, then there are other ways to handle the situation.
Custom names are not a requirement at all, but it would probably be nice - only if they are going to police it.
The people that have a problem with it could say the exact same thing to you.
Anyhow, you guys are completely missing the point, there is only 1 advantage to custom names, and that's the ability to show game parameters. If blizzard decides they don't want custom names, then there are other ways to handle the situation.
Custom names are not a requirement at all, but it would probably be nice - only if they are going to police it.
Um, serious;y? "They could say the same to you" um... yeah, if they're fucking retarded. We're not complaining because we see swear-words, or ads in lobby names. How could they say we need tougher skin when we can easily ignore such things?
And enlighten us, how would we go about game-modes without lobby names? Because so far every option consists of needless conviluted bullshit. Specific categories that require a map to be uploaded fifteen times with various combinations enabled? Various pre-made lobbies?
I mean seriously dude, how would you propose we make custom game-modes work without lobby names? And what if the map doesn't have game-modes built in, what if players make them up themselves? Such as the "lvl 20+" rule for RPG maps, how are players going to convey that without lobby-naming?
Seriously, I have said numerous times, some things you just can not fucking fix.
Screenshot taken on the EU server (no, it doesn't seem to work yet)
I'm not sure how they are going to split maps, since authors will never pick the right category themselves... still, I approve it if it means TDs and Tugs are going to be filtered somewhere else.
Y'know, what they should do is put a category like... "free zone" type shit. Where we can use lobby names, player-hosting, all the good stuff. And where Blizzard doesn't fucking police it. A place where they simply point to "Online interactions not rated by ESRB" and leave us the fuck alone.
Think of it like a swimming pool, they have the kiddy-pool for toddlers, and the real pool for everyone else. The default popularity system can be the kiddy-pool, for people too lazy/stupid to find a game that's not at the very top of a list. And the free-list can be for those of us who actually fall under the game's rating of T for Teen, and can manage by ourselves.
So basically "make it optional", which is what I've been saying since the beta. If people keel over and die every time they see an ad or a swear-word, they go to the kiddy-area, if people can simply ignore such things, they go to the free-area. EVERYBODY wins, but unfortunately a company like Blizzard would never do something so logical.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Oh, the real reason for this, and it oddly isn't in the photoshopped images, is for lobby names. We NEED lobby names. When I release my RPG, it's going to be a nightmare when people are wanting to play level 20+ only and meanwhile level 1's are joining the game. There's no way for me to deal with this as a map maker other than make several game-modes for each level bracket, but then id have like 6 maps on the list at once which is just dumb.
So yeah, expandable game list to show host-chosen lobby names.
I really don't think you are ever going to get custom lobby names to be honest, I mean blizzard is already banning maps for swear words, having lobby names is just another thing they have to police.
This is why I put game modes in the expanded list too, you could always have a Level 20+ Only game mode for example.
I know lobby names can be really useful and would be good, it's just that people always abuse them, swear in them, advertise website etc in them. If they aren't going to allow it then we should be able to display per lobby settings or something separate to mode.
I posted this same post on the relevant topic on the official forums, but figured I'd also post it here in hopes of having a higher chance of KratsAU seeing it, and for he sake of the posters here who haven't checked the official forum.
You keep saying you don't think they'll put in custom server names, but I have a couple ideas on how this really could work.
1.Word Filter - They already have a filter on published maps, why not just take the same filter, and run custom map names through it? As for filter avoidances like spacing words out or using symbols, you could use #2.
2.Suspend/Report System - People can report maps with names that are either advertisement spam(which, due to the fact that you have to have a code-activated account to get onto B.net, I think that advertisement spam is a very remote fear) or avoid the filter in some way. If a single server is reported, say, 3 times, the user gets a 24 ban on hosting and can only join maps others host. If this happens 3 in a 2 week period, they get a 1 week hosting ban, or something along those lines. EDIT: I know Blizzard wouldn't like leaving this in players' hands, but we don't want to see advertisements or offensive names either, and if we see an ad or filter avoidance and reporting them is just a right and a left click away, I think enough players will take the initiative to make a difference.
Due to the way you set up the image for checking individual servers, the host would have no reason to include the map name in the title, therefore cutting down on the character limit Blizzard would implement on server titles. They could put a 10 character limit on server names, and because you have to click on the map name to even see the server, people still know what options are being chosen and what the map is. For searching specific servers, it wouldn't be hard to search the map name, then from there look through the server listing.
I hope my ideas have been helpful. I have been against the popularity system 100% since I saw it, but reading through your thread and seeing what the system could be like with some modding gives me renewed hope for Bnet 2.0.
EDIT:Also, a worry of mine as to game type sorting is that letting the author input the game type leads to infinitely redundant categories. (example: TD, Tower Defense, Turret Defense, etc...) If Blizzard were to only allow preset categories, it wouldn't allow for the flexibility that original maps would require. If theres a Hero Arena with strong RPG or TD elements to it, the author would be torn as to which category to select. Allowing the author to select multiple categories to put the map into would create it's own problems, with authors selecting every category to increase exposure.
So maybe a preset list of game types, with the author being able to list their map as only 2 game types, with there being an 'Original' or 'Unique' category for authors with especially creative maps. To use one of the above examples of original maps, the author could put Hero Arena - Original.
Yeah I'm not saying a naming system is impossible, and they could filter words and use a report system (I mean they already have that built in), but it is more work for them at the end of the day, both to create and maintain the filters etc. (Kind of like when you see MMO's try and combat gold spam).
But honestly, if they did allow it in some form I think it would be great, I just don't think they will. If they prove me wrong then I will be very glad ;)
Honestly I think having popularity AND ratings AND favorites AND Number of games hosted clutters things up way too much and won't do that much to improve battlenet.
In my opinion, one change that needs to happen is that maps need to be divided into several categories and the list of games needs to be split into several lists. So when a player wants to join a game, rather than having all maps in a single list, they have to choose from a list of game categories such as Tower Defence, Tug, RPG, DOTA, Footman wars, first person shooter, turn based games, etc. and an Other category for games that do not fit under any of the other categories. Blizzard can do this in two ways. They could make it so that mapmakers have to choose from a list rather than have to input a string for the game category. Alternatively, they could make it so that the mapmaker has to input a string (like they do now) and if the mapmaker's string matches the name of one of blizzard's game categories then it goes in that list, otherwise it goes into the other list. This will make it significantly easiest for players to find the types of maps they want to play and as a result, more maps will be played. Also, it will prevent battlenet from being favorable to certain game types (because right now it is highly favorable to TDs and Tug games.
A second change that will improve battlenet is the option to see hosted games (and the titles of these games). I understand that the WC3 system had its disadvantages (it was annoying to have to search through all hosted games to find the game you want), but it also advantages (namely players could specify the mode of the map such as 4v4 or APEM) and some maps can only function properly if players can specify the game mode before it starts. So why not use the best of both systems and make it so that a player has to choose from a list of maps, like they do now (of course preferably subdivided into categories), and then the player can still join the game using the join game button like they do now, however give the player an additional button called 'show hosted games' and if a player clicks on that button they are immediately directed to a list of all games hosted of that map. Then players would be able to both find the map they want and see the names of the games hosted to find the game mode they want to join.
Instead of lobby names you are spose to use game variants.... since the pop system sorts the games by .....
for example you would have
I'm sad to see all the negative responses on the Battle.net forums. Everyone seems to hate the popularity system on battle.net, but have no faith in changing it whatsoever. "It won't happen," is their response, instead of trying. It's really sad. :(
@AegisRunestone: Go
Yeah it's just easier for people to whine and not put any effort in to supporting something. Human nature I guess.
It's also in our human nature not to click on that shiny Search button and see by ourselves how many threads full of suggestions were created since July, isn't it? Shame Beta forums were taken down, because you could find a lot more there and this very system was proposed dozens of times already in the past months.
Looks solid, nice screenshots.
@SouLCarveRR: Go
Are you being sarcastic or serious haha?
My RPG example kind of shows why that isn't really viable. I can't predict that people might want to play 'level 20+ only' or 'X Boss run' unless I make like 100 game variants. Then my RPG would be the only thing all over the popularity list.
"Pros Only" anyone?
Wouldn't be more work for them if they didn't feel the need to micro-manage and control us. I mean, we survived for over a decade dealing with custom lobby names. We didn't drop over and die, or sue blizzard every time we saw swear words or ads in the names. It being more work for blizzard isn't an excuse not to do something. They CHOSE to go all big brother on us, they CHOSE to micro-manage what we can see. So they can deal with the consequences. If it's too much work, here's an idea, stop babysitting us.
So yeah, custom lobby names would be nice, just put some simple safe-guards like world filters and a report system and be done with it. Blizzard chose to micro-manage our shit, so they can deal with policing it. But we NEED lobby names, there's simply no other way to relay various game-modes on maps. You can't do categories, or anything, as it gets too conviluted. The only way we'll ever see game-modes work is with lobby names, so it is a REQUIREMENT and Blizzard just needs to deal with it, or stop being Big Brother.
@Colt556: Go
They wouldn't have to if people didn't abuse the system. I don't particulary want to see lists of advertising and website spam in my game list. The only advantage of having custom names is to specify the current game parameters etc, so if they wont let us name our games there is definitely other stuff they can do.
But yeah they can use filters and regex to stop people putting in websites, but people just start using all sorts of dodgey stuff to get around it, so at the end of the day it still is more work for them. Just depends if they want to go that way or not.
While I think it overall would be better, I also think it's possible to have a great list without them.
I don't like to see random advertising either, but you know what I did? I kept scrolling up the list. The people who let that kind of shit offend them are the problem. Having people abuse the naming system was -NEVER- an issue, ever. You saw a name you didn't like? Just keep on walking. Overly sensitive people are the downfall of society.
But regardless, what you or I think is irrelevant, it's a REQUIREMENT. There's simply no other way to handle multiple game-modes. You can't put categories or something, since the map maker would have to specifically publish maps for every possible game-mode. There's simply no way to handle them without lobby names, people need the ability to just host and go "all random, easy mod, some other bullshit". And then especially for RPG's where game-modes aren't even official, just players making up their own game-modes such as "lvl 20+ only".
So yeah, while other things can be made to work with Blizzard's shitty, overly controlling system, this isn't one of them. Because you can't expect ANYONE to be able to predict every possible thing players will want. You can't expect map makers to make official game-modes for every possible variation, nor blizzard to implement special lobbies for every possible variant. It's unrealistic and outright impossible. So the only option is to leave it up to the players.
Now if only Blizzard would get their heads out of their asses and leave the ENTIRE system in the hands of the players, like it's been for the past decade, all these ideas and walking on egg-shells to suit Blizzard's nazi-ism would be unnecessary.
I love the +/- thing where it shows whos hosting and how many players. Ammount of games and favorites and ratings is a good idea but the way you portrayed it looks messy. But I LOVE this! :)
I made quite a long post before so maybe the information was lost, so I'll repeat.
Advertisement spam in SC2 won't happen, and if it does, report, report, report, and the advertiser loses their account, and the $60 they paid for the game, its that simple. Now that you don't find key's laying around for sc2 like you did wc3, chances are we won't see ad spam. If we do, we can report the account and after enough reports, it could theoretically get flagged for blizzard to take a look at personally, or for them to be autobanned. It plagued warcraft 3 in later years, but it won't plague sc2. EDIT: Oh, and for every account Blizz bans for ad spamming, they made $60, and that $60 isn't using up server space. So if any of it does happen, even with cost of employees including, Blizz is actually profiting from their attempts at ad spamming.
I agree with Colt, overly sensitive people need to stfu, get tougher skin, and get over it, but it's irrelevant here for the above reasons.
As another example of why game types won't work, I'm working on rebuilding Wintermaul Wars from wc3. I plan to eventually put in game modes. If you are a WMW Tournament vet, you'll know what I mean. Greed increases gold income speed, hyperspeed makes units move faster for a more difficult game, superspeed allows unlimited sending of units at the other team if you have the $, again for higher difficulty, and lifesteal is self-explanatory and leads to longer games with more tug-of-war. I always hosted that game and would generally go with greed and lifesteal enabled. With a game type system, I'd have to submit the map with greed enabled alone, and in every combination with the other game modes. Or, I can host, put Greed&Lifesteal in the name, and Blizzards precious server space is conserved, and I still get my game modes without making it unnecessarily complicated.
The people that have a problem with it could say the exact same thing to you.
Anyhow, you guys are completely missing the point, there is only 1 advantage to custom names, and that's the ability to show game parameters. If blizzard decides they don't want custom names, then there are other ways to handle the situation.
Custom names are not a requirement at all, but it would probably be nice - only if they are going to police it.
Um, serious;y? "They could say the same to you" um... yeah, if they're fucking retarded. We're not complaining because we see swear-words, or ads in lobby names. How could they say we need tougher skin when we can easily ignore such things?
And enlighten us, how would we go about game-modes without lobby names? Because so far every option consists of needless conviluted bullshit. Specific categories that require a map to be uploaded fifteen times with various combinations enabled? Various pre-made lobbies?
I mean seriously dude, how would you propose we make custom game-modes work without lobby names? And what if the map doesn't have game-modes built in, what if players make them up themselves? Such as the "lvl 20+" rule for RPG maps, how are players going to convey that without lobby-naming?
Seriously, I have said numerous times, some things you just can not fucking fix.
Screenshot taken on the EU server (no, it doesn't seem to work yet)
I'm not sure how they are going to split maps, since authors will never pick the right category themselves... still, I approve it if it means TDs and Tugs are going to be filtered somewhere else.
Y'know, what they should do is put a category like... "free zone" type shit. Where we can use lobby names, player-hosting, all the good stuff. And where Blizzard doesn't fucking police it. A place where they simply point to "Online interactions not rated by ESRB" and leave us the fuck alone.
Think of it like a swimming pool, they have the kiddy-pool for toddlers, and the real pool for everyone else. The default popularity system can be the kiddy-pool, for people too lazy/stupid to find a game that's not at the very top of a list. And the free-list can be for those of us who actually fall under the game's rating of T for Teen, and can manage by ourselves.
So basically "make it optional", which is what I've been saying since the beta. If people keel over and die every time they see an ad or a swear-word, they go to the kiddy-area, if people can simply ignore such things, they go to the free-area. EVERYBODY wins, but unfortunately a company like Blizzard would never do something so logical.