That's what everyone else said but they neither saw it themselves nor had a link.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blazur
If you read this yourself, I'll take your word for it. Everyone else just heard it from the grapevine.
Printable View
That's what everyone else said but they neither saw it themselves nor had a link.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blazur
If you read this yourself, I'll take your word for it. Everyone else just heard it from the grapevine.
Where are those god damn Clan Features? BNET feels empty without it.
Oh yeah, I distinctly recall them saying it. Been on the official forums since day 1 of the announcement and didn't miss a single blue post.Quote:
Originally Posted by TychusFindlay
Yes I'm that big of a geek.
Well you start a new thread after another and often start with (We all hate the story) and then the pool result is more like 20-40% hate/unlike the story rest like or love it. But then you start even another thread and still says the majority hates it... so if that is not spaming, I don't know what is and reason that i post here is that I think there are stronger argument about Starcraft being a good game than a bad one!Quote:
Originally Posted by dustinbrowder
I love Starcraft and that is why I am a member of Starcraft legacy! :)
If they didn't make the promise, my heart would have remained intact. It's now all over the floor, shattered into a million pieces.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blazur
Blazur is right. And now Justin laughed in that recent interview regarding old units. A real heart breaker.
Did terrible, terrible damage.
StarCraft II was awarded the Outstanding Achievement in Online Game Play and Strategy/Simulation Game of the Year, as well as being nominated for several other awards, by the Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences.
Source: http://www.interactive.org/awards/20...b=a_categories
It was also nominated for some lore things, including Character Performance for Tychus Findlay. So I guess battle.net > story, since it won an award for that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimera757
video game journalism is a fucking joke dude. Bnet 2.0 getting any sort of award is proof of that. It still lacks features that were utterly basic 10 years ago.
Money buys awards. It's as simple as that. Most award giving groups are funded by the big publishers who pay large sums of money to ensure they qualify for such awards. And other organizations don't even play the games; they simply follow the hype machine and award games that way.
Actually it was not stated ALL the units would be there. But the Sc1 units that were cut would be there, and I clearly remember Karune saying the Dragoon would be there, and the Reaver too. Omitting the Dragoon has actually been a BIG mistake.
As the Taldarim should have used dragoons instead of Stalkers because Stalkers are Dark Templar technology and Taldarim are regressed Khalai warriors.
Inconsistencies like that, and the weird flow of the story is what ruined it for me. Sure its good compared to many games, but it does not have the "Epic" feeling the sc1 story had.
I was also genuinely disappointed that so few units were included for the Protoss and Zerg. Seriously, only Scourge and Scout?...Thats like, the least used units in Sc1
That's what I remember as well. I even remember an SCL article listing the units that would be there, and all of them were. I don't remember them every saying every single SCBW unit would be in the editor.
-- The Terrans got so many units because its a Terran campaign. The Zerg and Protoss, I'm sure, will get more in their campaigns.
Phill Gonzales has promised that for Heart of the Swarm. Blizzard has suggested (but not said alright) that the lurker will appear in HotS. (I suspect the lurker is in the map editor since it was removed from the campaign at the last-minute. There's still "hidden" transmissions saying to watch out for lurkers in the campaign maps.)
The lurker has not been removed. It is still in the editor
It's been removed from the campaign.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gurluash
Yeah I never understood that...Maybe they did it because Protoss only had 1 unit.
Probably just didn't fit within the campaign. Cloaked units that rape infantry (what you're most likely massing) was probably a bit too much for a first installment.
As I already knew most of the people think the story sucks more than bnet, but additionally 20% think they both suck.
Overall 63% think that either one of the two or both suck, while only 37% percent think that both the story and bnet are great.
So black and white! D:Quote:
Originally Posted by dustinbrowder
Amazing how the power of words can change things.Quote:
Originally Posted by dustinbrowder
Let me tell you, this poll shows that a small cluster of people who talk to each other often can give a completely skewed perception of a subject that doesn't mean anything whatsoever. I will refer to my post that you didn't really reply to here at all. I remind you, this was stated as what I perceived as your intent with this and other posts here in the forums...
It seems that you are SOOOO desperate to try and get this feeling that others are complaining with you that you will actually exaggerate statistics to try and make you feel like you ARE part of a mob.Quote:
In light of all of this, I feel that you're starting these posts in a pessimistic/negative way to try and help you deal with your own frustrations. You want to complain and it's obvious you're seeking other people who want to complain with you. This sort of high focus on negative points will lead to a mob mentality conversation that typically goes into deconstructive conversation.
What's worse? These threads, or constructive ones?
These are worse.
Sounds like those anti-Obamacare guys. They say (truthfully) that most Americans don't like Obamacare, conveniently not mentioning that some of those guys don't like it because it doesn't go far enough. (Less than half of Americans support repeal.) You can use real-life statistics and still make them seem like something else.
70% of all people know that :)
There is nothing wrong with my post Gifted and I'm talking about people in this forums, not the entire planet or universe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gifted
Heck for all I know there may be 10 billion aliens who look just like protoss who play and love SC2, but they are not voting in this pool are they?
If you convert the numbers into percentages you would see that those are the precentages and I don't see how numbers vs percentages is different!
Its the SAME thing Gifted! I'll repeat once more its the SAME thing.
And you have an option to like both or hate both, if neither people have an option to just write what they think and are not forced with gun on their head to vote, be reasonable .
Just adding my 2 cents here. Concordantly with Gifted's post, even if you started a poll on all fansites and got a tally of around 1000 voters (and believe me this would be hard), you still have a relatively small sample that accounts for less than .001% of the population of StarCraft II players. You can't make general conclusions with small samples. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying your poll is pointless. However you must be a bit more mindful of your comments and conclusions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gifted
For instance qualitative research usually involves working with small samples (less than 30 observations) and are effective in some market research situations. With that in mind, some valid conclusions that could be drawn from your poll:
Some players find the Wings of Liberty story very uninteresting/boring.
The story can perhaps be a reason of why people are unsatisfied with StarCraft II.
@dustinbrowder: LOL, NOOOW you acknowledge his posts :D
BTW that is not true. I'm just posting an interesting topic to talk about. I'm totally fine if 100% are in love with their SC2 game or 100% hate SC2. I don't want to be in a SC2 mob, group, division, gathering, army or whatever.Quote:
It seems that you are SOOOO desperate to try and get this feeling that others are complaining with you that you will actually exaggerate statistics to try and make you feel like you ARE part of a mob.
I'm just posting an interesting topic for discussion, which many of the people in this forum are turning into English mobs from the witch hunting periods and truing to prove I'm against Blizzard, hate SC2, want to shit talk about SC2 and whatever, but that is just not true at all.
If someone thinks these EULA's are okay and that its right for blizzard they have to just write so, its very simple" I agree with these eula's and don't mind blizzard doing this" as easy as it could be, without going personal on me and calling me everything that I am not and what I don't think, like I'm some kind of witch that wants to eat their baby(sc2).
How can a topic that was discussed on release day, the week after, a month after and later on so many times be still interesting?Quote:
Originally Posted by dustinbrowder
Wasn't it because of hype, promise of awesome, and the long wait?Quote:
Originally Posted by Genopath
Some people still hold a torch :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Arkalis
Someone should copy DustinBrowders post but start it with more positive energy?^^
Wish is best? The story or bnet?
(poll)
*I like the story the most*
*I like Bnet the most*
*Like them both ;)*
*Story sucks*
*Bnet sucks*
*I dont like neither of them*
*blank*
Think the results would have ended very differently? :)
It was more the lack of character developement and consistency. Many of the missions were good individually but you never felt they meant something.Quote:
Originally Posted by GnaReffotsirk
Also many characters meant nothing...Kaschinsky?...Just a guy in the bar...Stettman?...A guy who does research without personality.
Thats what people resent about it, it feels inconsistent. Its not a bad game but compared to Sc1 it just feels as if you just do missions and only the last ones matters.
Swann? Guy who gives you blueprints.
Only Horner and Tychus were developed properly, and dr. Hanson...If you did her missions early you would completely lose a good character you could speak to for many missions, same for Tosh if you sided with Nova.
Per you: [As I already knew most of the people think the story sucks more than bnet, but additionally 20% think they both suck.] I'm just saying... reading this can lead people to incorrect conclusions. I was just clarifying by another angle how it could be read.Quote:
Originally Posted by dustinbrowder
Per you: [but additionally 20% think they both suck.]Quote:
If you convert the numbers into percentages you would see that those are the precentages and I don't see how numbers vs percentages is different!
Its the SAME thing Gifted! I'll repeat once more its the SAME thing.
Statistic above: 7 say they both suck, correct statistic: 16.67%. You didn't even say "about 20%". For this reason, there is a major difference between our posts and we aren't saying the same thing. One is exaggerated falsely to likewise exaggerate an opinion as being more true than it actually is. The other is showing how the point is weakened by exaggerating the statistics to a painfully truthful degree.
This is merely showing how words can change an argument quite easily.
You are correct, people can vote if they want to or not. But because of lack of flexible options in this poll, the data that leads up to your conclusion is probably misrepresented.Quote:
And you have an option to like both or hate both, if neither people have an option to just write what they think and are not forced with gun on their head to vote, be reasonable .
It was stated in a few posts above mine perfectly. If the way the original post was presented was different, you'd most likely get dramatically different results. I'm ALMOST tempted to create examples to prove the point... but since they'd essentially be duplicates of existing threads, It wouldn't be worthwhile and I'd be forced by morality to moderate my own posts and close them >.<
I find it crazy that this thread has gone on for 7 pages just relating to a poll that only shows a general sense of relative ranking for 42 voters. To satisfy dustin's sense of numbers is the same as percentages which obviously has flaws. But since the media does it obviously can't fault dustin for wanting to do the same to exaggerate and hype up the results. So with a ranking system of out of 10....
33.33% rank story below Bnet.
4.76% rank Bnet below story.
16.67% rank both story and bnet below 4 out of 10. The difference in their ranking is probably around +/-1 (both suck)
45.24% rank story and bnet above 6 out of 10. Again with a difference of +/-1. (both awesome)
Note: the 4 and 6 seems the most conservative. Might be more realistic to pick 3 and 7 but it depends a lot on preferences.
Then the poll doesn't allow multiple choices. So the people who rank story below bnet or bnet below story do not give accurate data on even the rough rankings of them in "out of 10" terms. It is possible that I rank story 6 and B.net 8 then i pick the option of story sucks. The best way to make use of the data is to split it. The first two options being one poll and the last two being a second poll.
So that would mean 14 out of 16 people think the story is worse than B.net.
Then 19 out of 26 people think that both the story and B.net are awesome (meaning above 6 out of 10 ranking with a +/-1 difference).
Then comes the "suck". Would it be like a -3 ranking lower than another ranking to be considered suck. i.e. B.net 8/10 and story 5/10 so story sucks. Because the first two options just ask for relative ranking, the people who pick story sucks; we can only say they think the story is worse than B.net and can only assume B.net has a ranking (out of 10) differential of at least +1. So I would say the poll is badly made, very very preference driven and can't even be used to assign a number out of 10 for both story and B.net.
So dustin I have this to say to you. Make better polls. And i fully expect dustin to post again saying how everyone is wrong and doesn't know how percentages and numbers,etc work and only he knows how they work among all the members in the forum.
/ Thread?
I think we all get what dustin was getting at, and failed (again).
This thread is utterly pointless, it is mind-numbing...
Given that your post didn't start with "Activision is EVIL!", "Blizzard is the devil" or "StarCraft 2 is teh suck!", I doubt he even read it.Quote:
Originally Posted by JackhammerIV
On-topic though, I think that the original poll should be deleted and then edited in with a better poll, if this topic is going to stay.
How 'bout a poll to keep the poll...?
> Yezz
> Kill it wiht fire
I think all dustin's polls should be examined the first time he makes the thread then someone should make a proper poll that actually makes more sense. Then an admin should close dustin's poll thread and move the discussion to the new thread. Or else we'll end up with where we're at now which is basically saying the poll is flawed and isn't saying much.Quote:
Originally Posted by TychusFindlay
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ignoranceQuote:
Originally Posted by TychusFindlay
I too feel sorry for Gifted in this case, but I admire that he tried.