Alright, after reading through everything I feel compelled to concede the argument. I can see the other point of view more clearly, and I realize there is a lot of validity to it. I was indeed wrong. Not wholly, but on the `greater part` of my belief and reasoning(Against specific reasons why B.Net 2.0 is considered inferior). I understand the situation more better and can now agree with many of you.
1. My recommendation would be don't suggest TL to support your argument lol. Right now there's a 40 or 50 page thread supporting prozaic and the rest of us :/
2. True, and that player has probably already quit playing because subconsciously the lack of social features (and custom game system) caused it.
3. Did they spent a lot on the interface design? Prozaic do you know on this matter?
4. Can you provide a statistic or evidence of the retention thing? I'm genuinely interested to know how much more players have stayed playing SC2 vs other Blizz RTS's over a period of X time.
5.Overall I see your arguments, and I guess we'll just have to disagree on bnet 2.0. Most of the reason people are fired up is because a lot of time has passed, and the same thing is happening with D3 now. Husky's vid reminded me of the whole design and the features that I missed.
1. Can you link it to me. So that I may read over it.
2. Those players are irrelevant. If this were an MMO game, it becomes mandatory/high priority to try and retain casuals. Starcraft 2 is only designed as a competitive esports game. Much more than Warcraft 3. Its successful as an esports title. Played nearly everywhere as a major tournament game. It will forcibly die out with the release of Warcraft 4.
Ultimately, everything becomes boring at some point, People that have finished the single-player and dont like ladder too much will eventually quit(until the next expansion). Perhaps better social features and the custom map scene can keep them on for longer. The point is, its just not that of a big deal to the company if they quit because its almost a certainty for people that aren`t die-hard into strategy games and ladder play.
4. Follow the esports scene. Its still very strong and with a huge following of the core players(ladder). This, even before the first expansion. It shows no signs of dying out.
5. Yes, agree tp disagree on B.net 2.0. I just think that if I were at Blizzard, I would follow the same direction they are going in. Esports is the only priority for a game like this. Starcraft 2 is a tournament `Counter-strike` game in that pursuit.
Casual retention and social interaction for a cash cow is the only priority of WoW. And of course, Diablo 3 will be everyone`s single player and multiplayer `fix`.
The different games cater to different groups and company priorities. WoW PVP will never be a competitive esport(lol), and on the flip-side, the custom game scene in Starcraft 2 and social interaction will never be strong enough to really keep people motivated and interested in a strategy game( I mean, c`mon , RTS is niche compared to FPS and other entertainment sources as it is, and there is much better things to play/do than play custom maps o.o)
Now Im not saying it cant be improved. Sure it can. But, it just doesn`t do anything for Blizzard and they have nothing to gain financially by efforts focused on areas like this. Hence whenever they give us what we want(and they have overtime delivered on a lot of what was requested by the community) or improve the editor etc, people should really be grateful.
1.WC3's interface and functionality on B-Net 1.0 feels more modern than SC2. That's the root of the problem. 2.Many features were removed for the sake of "visually pleasing" aesthetics. So while 2.0 might look pretty, it has less functionality than its predecessor making it feel antiquated.
1. No. Take someone who has never played wc3 and sc2 and have them compare both interfaces. Starcraft 2 is better. The interface on Wc3 does not feel more modern. This may be a point of opinion, but millions of Starcraft 2 players love this over Wc3. Maybe start a poll on TL or something, but ,yea. Im pretty certain
2.Less is not always a bad thing. Especially if its only for simplicity. Now, again, If someone never played Wc3, they wouldn`t have these thoughts or care whatsoever about missing functionality they do not need. The missing functionality itself is few for players(`clans`, `chat commands` etc, Nothing critical or core).
Its obvious that mappers(and some players) from Wc3 have the biggest problem with B.net 2.0 and have greater preference with B.net 1.0. Its mostly the mappers though.
However, from a USER standpoint, the new system is much more visually better and it does what it needs to do. Simple as that.
The company obviously spent a lot of money on research and development of the interface, with top developers leading it. Its impossible to say Wc3 interface functions/looks better. I cant fathom why anyone would think that. Just impossible.
This is like the Myspace vs Facebook argument. The former had more functionality(You could add music on your page, change its color and all sorts of crazy stuff), but it looked kinda ugly(like the Wc3 chains up/down/up interface). Then Facebook comes in, very SIMPLISTIC, clean and functional only to whats needed(no extra frills etc) and it smashes and destroys Myspace. Simplicity for the masses.
Part of the reason Starcraft 2 is so successful and has a higher retention ratio of players(compared to other strategy games, and their life cycles) is because the interface is great. Maybe not perfect, but far better than Warcraft 3 and other strategy games.
@Everyone
I watched the video. Nothing special. Talking about clans, chatrooms, and tournaments etc. I thought it was way more deeper and insightful into the technical nature of how B.net 1.0 is superior(as some of you guys in this thread have made it out to be), but Husky just mentions some of the stuff he likes/missed in Wc3 B.net. Thats hardly a cause for anti-b.net 2.0 celebration.
But in all seriousness, the ignorance is still there ... you gotta work on that mate.
I didnt have time to go into detail or explain point for point against the arguments in this thread. It was a rant, and nothing more, because I couldn`t care less at the time(Similar to how I care less about what you think "mate").
I do indeed respect everyone`s view, and I apologize to zenx1 for going off at him like that. Nothing personal. Its widely known that I lose patience whenever Sc2mapster revisits this topic of B.net , the pop system etc. We`ve done this a million times already. Not really an excuse on my part, but this is almost always a pointless and dead end discussion.
Still, my level of "care" has now risen and warranted me to detail B.net 2.0 against B.net 1.0 in a way that I hope can explain the system from the point of view its meant to be seen (From Blizzard). In a thread I`ll soon post up.
I wasn`t really in a good mood when posting here yesterday. I apologize if I seemed overly hostile. Whenever I see people bring up this topic, it just makes it worse.
I`ll watch the video now and reply to it in detail soon(in a calm manner).
Yes. zenx1 knows more than foolish Blizzard of course. He should be in charge of designing future systems for every company in the world.
No, wait, Zenx1 is just a silly kid that suffers from nostalgia and a critical lack of understanding.
I`ll finish this conversation tomorrow.
Wc3 and its b.net 1.0 was good back then, but now its thrash. Failsky is probably being a drama queen as usual(nothing better to do) and exaggerating the situation(Haven`t see the vid yet).
C'mon, I remember playing on SC1's BNet (which is extremely similar to WC3's), and I can tell you that BNet 2.0 is regressive. Seriously, the biggest downfall was the 25 friend max. That's seriously one of my biggest problems with it. (That and if someone makes a second account they now take up 2 "friend slots" out of your 25, but you still have to find out the new name. Yeah, 2 biggest problems right there...)
2. Wraith, I preferred the older BNet. Newer doesn't mean better. It may have been old to you, but I hate how now you have to hit tab to get to talk to someone. 3. In WC3 you can just go "/w randomname blahblahblah" and you can talk to anyone without having to find their stupid name first. Plus, there couldn't be 20 people with the same name as you.
1. Not enough arguments to validate that.
2. I honestly prefer `Doom` over single player FPS games like Crysis/2 etc. Generally speaking Crysis and similar are indeed better games which more people would enjoy/pay/use in this new era of gaming, and my preference makes little difference in denying the reality of that situation. See what I mean?
Nostalgia can be a strong force though.
3. Not sure if I understand correctly your point. Aren`t names in the Sc2 friends list alphabetically sorted?, Whats so hard about finding them?
'Paid name changes' that Husky talks about, for example, weren't needed in War3 because an account was nothing more than a name with some stats behind it. In SC2, your account is integrated in to everything you can imagine. I don't give a crap about showing my SC2 achievements on facebook, but for example the possibility to add a bought game to your account to allow you to download it anywhere on the go is a nifty function. It's understandable that they no longer allow people to change names and accounts at random now that there's so much value bound to them - they are probably also saved on bigger databases that cost more money to maintain as well.
This is a good point which people fail to understand. Like Husky.
from day1 of starcraft Iv said wc3 bnet was better, there is no other way around it. (if you couldnt invite friends to a game and such are kinda minor problems that wc3 had)
Its so sad how everything they had achieved went down the drain. I cant even imagine HOTS bnet improving by a lot. It will probly be a little bit better but (clan support, tournaments, better chat channels, better friendlist are a huge thing! and I doubt they will add any of those) I liked how in wc3 you could even see what people are actually playing instead of now you have to be "real ID" friends to see that. The real ID thing is one of the biggest bullshit things ever! Why do they limit things in such a stupid way.
Also I hate the thing that you cannot even write /join chat channel or such commands in sc2 chat or /w somebody...wtf is up with that?!?! The joining channels is also bullshit. Why cant they give us option to bookmark channels and join from there if you so desire (sorta like firefox UI would be sorta nice, draging below search bar). Even though you couldnt be in multichannels on wc3 the chat channels still were superior....
once I get going on this subject its hard to stop...
1. Clan support. Sure, ye, its something that should be added.
2. Better chat channels. Nah Sc2 chat channels are better designed. Wc3 had an archaic style thing going on, which was good for its TIME.
Also I hate the thing that you cannot even write /join chat channel or such commands in sc2 chat or /w somebody...wtf is up with that?!?! The joining channels is also bullshit.
You think backwards. Why the fk would I want to write dos prompt style "/join" or "/w". Navigation and control is more streamlined now and faster. The above comment makes you sound really retarded.
3. Better friends list. Nothing wrong with the Sc2 design, and I fail to see how crappy wc3`s friends list is any better.
I liked how in wc3 you could even see what people are actually playing instead of now you have to be "real ID" friends to see that. The real ID thing is one of the biggest bullshit things ever! Why do they limit things in such a stupid way.
What if I dont want people to know what Im playing?. Its none of your business to know what Im playing/doing on the game. If I wanted to let you know, its in my control to do so. Though ofc, match history in Sc2 provides enough for the average joe `friend` added. Did wc3 even have a match history feature?. I cant seem to remember now.
Real ID interfaces into Sc2, WoW, and soon D3. Its a great feature.
Even though you couldnt be in multichannels on wc3 the chat channels still were superior....
By now its evident that its probably only superior in your imagination.
once I get going on this subject its hard to stop...
Pretty sure you wouldn`t be able to add anything beyond what you mentioned anyway, but goodluck trying to think about "stuff" that made wc3 b.net so awesome beyond what minor accepetable things you already mentioned(Clan support and pfft, maybe one or two other features at most)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Alright, after reading through everything I feel compelled to concede the argument. I can see the other point of view more clearly, and I realize there is a lot of validity to it. I was indeed wrong. Not wholly, but on the `greater part` of my belief and reasoning(Against specific reasons why B.Net 2.0 is considered inferior). I understand the situation more better and can now agree with many of you.
1. Can you link it to me. So that I may read over it.
2. Those players are irrelevant. If this were an MMO game, it becomes mandatory/high priority to try and retain casuals. Starcraft 2 is only designed as a competitive esports game. Much more than Warcraft 3. Its successful as an esports title. Played nearly everywhere as a major tournament game. It will forcibly die out with the release of Warcraft 4.
Ultimately, everything becomes boring at some point, People that have finished the single-player and dont like ladder too much will eventually quit(until the next expansion). Perhaps better social features and the custom map scene can keep them on for longer. The point is, its just not that of a big deal to the company if they quit because its almost a certainty for people that aren`t die-hard into strategy games and ladder play.
4. Follow the esports scene. Its still very strong and with a huge following of the core players(ladder). This, even before the first expansion. It shows no signs of dying out.
5. Yes, agree tp disagree on B.net 2.0. I just think that if I were at Blizzard, I would follow the same direction they are going in. Esports is the only priority for a game like this. Starcraft 2 is a tournament `Counter-strike` game in that pursuit.
Casual retention and social interaction for a cash cow is the only priority of WoW. And of course, Diablo 3 will be everyone`s single player and multiplayer `fix`.
The different games cater to different groups and company priorities. WoW PVP will never be a competitive esport(lol), and on the flip-side, the custom game scene in Starcraft 2 and social interaction will never be strong enough to really keep people motivated and interested in a strategy game( I mean, c`mon , RTS is niche compared to FPS and other entertainment sources as it is, and there is much better things to play/do than play custom maps o.o)
Now Im not saying it cant be improved. Sure it can. But, it just doesn`t do anything for Blizzard and they have nothing to gain financially by efforts focused on areas like this. Hence whenever they give us what we want(and they have overtime delivered on a lot of what was requested by the community) or improve the editor etc, people should really be grateful.
1. No. Take someone who has never played wc3 and sc2 and have them compare both interfaces. Starcraft 2 is better. The interface on Wc3 does not feel more modern. This may be a point of opinion, but millions of Starcraft 2 players love this over Wc3. Maybe start a poll on TL or something, but ,yea. Im pretty certain
2.Less is not always a bad thing. Especially if its only for simplicity. Now, again, If someone never played Wc3, they wouldn`t have these thoughts or care whatsoever about missing functionality they do not need. The missing functionality itself is few for players(`clans`, `chat commands` etc, Nothing critical or core).
Its obvious that mappers(and some players) from Wc3 have the biggest problem with B.net 2.0 and have greater preference with B.net 1.0. Its mostly the mappers though.
However, from a USER standpoint, the new system is much more visually better and it does what it needs to do. Simple as that.
The company obviously spent a lot of money on research and development of the interface, with top developers leading it. Its impossible to say Wc3 interface functions/looks better. I cant fathom why anyone would think that. Just impossible.
This is like the Myspace vs Facebook argument. The former had more functionality(You could add music on your page, change its color and all sorts of crazy stuff), but it looked kinda ugly(like the Wc3 chains up/down/up interface). Then Facebook comes in, very SIMPLISTIC, clean and functional only to whats needed(no extra frills etc) and it smashes and destroys Myspace. Simplicity for the masses.
Part of the reason Starcraft 2 is so successful and has a higher retention ratio of players(compared to other strategy games, and their life cycles) is because the interface is great. Maybe not perfect, but far better than Warcraft 3 and other strategy games.
@Everyone
I watched the video. Nothing special. Talking about clans, chatrooms, and tournaments etc. I thought it was way more deeper and insightful into the technical nature of how B.net 1.0 is superior(as some of you guys in this thread have made it out to be), but Husky just mentions some of the stuff he likes/missed in Wc3 B.net. Thats hardly a cause for anti-b.net 2.0 celebration.
I didnt have time to go into detail or explain point for point against the arguments in this thread. It was a rant, and nothing more, because I couldn`t care less at the time(Similar to how I care less about what you think "mate").
I do indeed respect everyone`s view, and I apologize to zenx1 for going off at him like that. Nothing personal. Its widely known that I lose patience whenever Sc2mapster revisits this topic of B.net , the pop system etc. We`ve done this a million times already. Not really an excuse on my part, but this is almost always a pointless and dead end discussion.
Still, my level of "care" has now risen and warranted me to detail B.net 2.0 against B.net 1.0 in a way that I hope can explain the system from the point of view its meant to be seen (From Blizzard). In a thread I`ll soon post up.
Funny joke;-)
@ProzaicMuze: Go
I wasn`t really in a good mood when posting here yesterday. I apologize if I seemed overly hostile. Whenever I see people bring up this topic, it just makes it worse.
I`ll watch the video now and reply to it in detail soon(in a calm manner).
@zenx1: Go
Yes. zenx1 knows more than foolish Blizzard of course. He should be in charge of designing future systems for every company in the world.
No, wait, Zenx1 is just a silly kid that suffers from nostalgia and a critical lack of understanding.
I`ll finish this conversation tomorrow.
Wc3 and its b.net 1.0 was good back then, but now its thrash. Failsky is probably being a drama queen as usual(nothing better to do) and exaggerating the situation(Haven`t see the vid yet).
1. Not enough arguments to validate that.
2. I honestly prefer `Doom` over single player FPS games like Crysis/2 etc. Generally speaking Crysis and similar are indeed better games which more people would enjoy/pay/use in this new era of gaming, and my preference makes little difference in denying the reality of that situation. See what I mean?
Nostalgia can be a strong force though.
3. Not sure if I understand correctly your point. Aren`t names in the Sc2 friends list alphabetically sorted?, Whats so hard about finding them?
This is a good point which people fail to understand. Like Husky.
1. Clan support. Sure, ye, its something that should be added.
2. Better chat channels. Nah Sc2 chat channels are better designed. Wc3 had an archaic style thing going on, which was good for its TIME.
Also I hate the thing that you cannot even write /join chat channel or such commands in sc2 chat or /w somebody...wtf is up with that?!?! The joining channels is also bullshit.
You think backwards. Why the fk would I want to write dos prompt style "/join" or "/w". Navigation and control is more streamlined now and faster. The above comment makes you sound really retarded.
3. Better friends list. Nothing wrong with the Sc2 design, and I fail to see how crappy wc3`s friends list is any better.
I liked how in wc3 you could even see what people are actually playing instead of now you have to be "real ID" friends to see that. The real ID thing is one of the biggest bullshit things ever! Why do they limit things in such a stupid way.
What if I dont want people to know what Im playing?. Its none of your business to know what Im playing/doing on the game. If I wanted to let you know, its in my control to do so. Though ofc, match history in Sc2 provides enough for the average joe `friend` added. Did wc3 even have a match history feature?. I cant seem to remember now.
Real ID interfaces into Sc2, WoW, and soon D3. Its a great feature.
Even though you couldnt be in multichannels on wc3 the chat channels still were superior....
By now its evident that its probably only superior in your imagination.
once I get going on this subject its hard to stop...
Pretty sure you wouldn`t be able to add anything beyond what you mentioned anyway, but goodluck trying to think about "stuff" that made wc3 b.net so awesome beyond what minor accepetable things you already mentioned(Clan support and pfft, maybe one or two other features at most)