SC:L Article - Battle.net 2.0 Concerns

This article is addressed to both Blizzard as well as the community to voice our concerns about the direction of Battle.net 2.0: http://sclegacy.com/articles/730-battlenet-20-concerns

Mad props to Gifted and LoA for the countless man hours devoted to writing this article; truly it is a beast. I'd like to share this comment left by Gifted while they were working on it:

Quote:

---

Sorry I fell asleep on the keyboard last night, surprised that I didn't leave any collateral damage on the document. Been working on it further this morning.

---

I hope the article adequately reflects all your thoughts as well; it is our intention to send a message with this article and hopefully generate some sort of impact. :)

I hope everyone enjoys. :)

Thanks to Gradius and rise for support and the rest of the SC:L staff who found the time to contribute.

~LoA

I wouldn't stop there, much of this information was inspired directly by concerns of the community that matched directly with our own. Thank you to the community for your contributions and thoughts around the forums and beyond.

Heh, I stumbled onto that article on from the little window boxes at the top fifteen minutes ago. I have to say it is the most perfect articulation of the problem I've ever read. Basically this articulates everything I've thought about the issue and a bunch of stuff I haven't.

Mad props to Gifted and LoA for writing this. Seriously, this puts any superficial kittens video to shame.

I tried to write something like this on the b-net forums and so much got lost from head to text :P. Totally agree on how the central issue of this isn't greed or idiocy but a lack of meaningful dialogue and insular thinking.

post 256: http://forums.battle.net/thread.html...5000&pageNo=13

Quote:

---

# A remedy to this is to open communications. Open up dialogue. Get more (good) -cms. But it isn't just a one sided thing, more meaningful feedback also needs to reach the ears of the developer, and to be meaningfully discussed. You posted something earlier along these lines, and I think right now Blizzard should focus on that. Call me naive, but I still think Blizzard has it's customers interests at heart, that you guys want to make a good game as much as you want to make a good profit, and right now as Blizzard is probably growing in size day by day, you need to really take an active stance in ensuring that continues.

---

Blizzard needs to read this article you guys wrote. And not through a list of memos and reports from a CM.

Thanks for the thoughts NewComplex. Now, don't get me wrong, it may be elaborate and very well thought out, but it doesn't conclusively share ALL of our concerns on battle.net. We have more, but frankly, this thing is a beast so far. We also felt it important to provide suggestions for solutions, even if they aren't THE solution, it could be the step in the right direction in terms of finding the true resolution at the end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gifted

Thanks for the thoughts NewComplex. Now, don't get me wrong, it may be elaborate and very well thought out, but it doesn't conclusively share ALL of our concerns on battle.net. We have more, but frankly, this thing is a beast so far. We also felt it important to provide suggestions for solutions, even if they aren't THE solution, it could be the step in the right direction in terms of finding the true resolution at the end.

---

The part that really made me happy was your small segment that the core issue is the lack of communication and insular thinking on behalf of Blizzard, what I think is really the root of the problem. It was a perfect articulation of my thoughts on the issue. I'm sure their are many more you could write about :)

We could give them all the ideas in the world, and if that isn't fixed, it wouldn't matter. The issue is as you said, a gradual fading of the player perspective on blizzards behalf. Its how statements like "Do you really want chat channels" became an acceptable viewpoint from Blizzard developers. And I think if they take to heart the importance of reengaging meaningful community dialogue in such a constantly growing company, really, they don't need us for every individual suggestion. Their skilled designers, we just need to make sure we're designing for the same goal.


Obviously b-net has many more specific, individual issues, but I think a lot of them are things that aren't really in our power to fix simply because theirs so many. They have a set of priorities, and we have a set of priorities, and our number one should be making our priorities resemble each other more. This means on our behalf they need to give clear communication on there priorities, some which seems controversial in our eyes, like Facebook intergration, and get us to understand them, and we need to ensure they understand our set of priorities, which they don't presently do.

That's true, but at the same time it's important to switch shoes and realize that phrases like what you said cause parts of the degradation of the communication as well. It's also our perception of Blizzard individually as well. People who assume that Blizzard doesn't care about anything but Money won't be able to contribute in meaningful conversation easily if in reality Blizzard is being 100% honest and wants to make a great game. But the article touches on that far better than I am right now. You've even said that yourself as well in the item you quoted above :)

In other words, we're on the same page.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gifted

People who assume that Blizzard doesn't care about anything but Money won't be able to contribute in meaningful conversation easily if in reality Blizzard is being 100% honest and wants to make a great game.

---

Yeah, we're basically on the same page, and thats why I like this article so much :p.

I get pretty pissed when I see people ruining some legit issue with OMG BOBBY KOTICK IS LIEK HEAD OF BLIZZARD AND HES TEH DEVIL, but at the same time, I get where their coming from.

Its basically the result of a decade of a complete lack of communication in regards to Starcraft. WoW moderators interact a lot more frequently and ghostcrawler sometimes holds meaningful conversations, but as far as Starcraft goes, nothing. It isn't at all hard to think that they're just a bunch of faceless suits. I know enough to know its more complex then that, but it isn't a random fear.

And likewise, I bet it isn't hard for them to think we're just a bunch of kids screaming "OMG BOBBY KOTICK IS LIEK HEAD OF BLIZZARD AND HES TEH DEVIL".
----


Hey Gifted, have you ever played EvE online? One thing I think that would benefit both the community and blizzard as a company would be to adopt a bit of their practices. Specifically, CCP, the dev studio behind it, has this elected "player council" which is comprised of a bunch of community representatives from casual-core to hardcore which go meet CCP in person a couple times a year to discuss issues the community has been having.

As a result, from my couple years playing EvE, I've seen tons of people call CCP idiots, not knowing what they're doing, but I've seen like all of two people call of money-grubbing drones or something with that gist.

I think that system would work really well for Blizzard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by newcomplex

Yeah, we're basically on the same page, and thats why I like this article so much :p.

---

kk :) Good to confirm

Quote:

---

Its basically the result of a decade of a complete lack of communication in regards to Starcraft. WoW moderators interact a lot more frequently and ghostcrawler sometimes holds meaningful conversations, but as far as Starcraft goes, nothing. It isn't at all hard to think that they're just a bunch of faceless suits. I know enough to know its more complex then that, but it isn't a random fear.

---

Well, this is another example of people needing to step back and examine themselves more so. For example, were you aware of a thread which constituted 20 replies from Xordiah within a handful of hours? It was a full conversation trying to find solutions to a problem. I'd deem that "Meaningful conversation". Also, the amount of communication on the battle.net beta forums is rather substancial compared to the old days of Karune sending less than 200 words every 4 business days. But even so, we got QA batches every 10 business days at that time, so it evened out. The communication has been there, but it wasn't always meaningful. (with the exception of droughts leading up to Blizzcons, but I digress)

Quote:

---

Hey Gifted, have you ever played EvE online? One thing I think that would benefit both the community and blizzard as a company would be to adopt a bit of their practices. Specifically, CCP, the dev studio behind it, has this elected "player council" which is comprised of a bunch of community representatives from casual-core to hardcore which go meet CCP in person a couple times a year to discuss issues the community has been having.

As a result, from my couple years playing EvE, I've seen tons of people call CCP idiots, not knowing what they're doing, but I've seen like all of two people call of money-grubbing drones or something with that gist.

I think that system would work really well for Blizzard.

---

I have not played EvE online, but I am familiar with the CCP and whatnot. When I consulted for other companies, that hit the bullet list of meetings more than once in more than one company. It's one of many viable solutions with pros and cons. While I can see benefits, I also don't know if that's the exact solution that would work for Blizzard. Personally though, it can always provoke some interesting discussion as a consideration. (My opinions at least on the matter)

Quote:

---

Well, this is another example of people needing to step back and examine themselves more so. For example, were you aware of a thread which constituted 20 replies from Xordiah within a handful of hours? It was a full conversation trying to find solutions to a problem. I'd deem that "Meaningful conversation". Also, the amount of communication on the battle.net beta forums is rather substancial compared to the old days of Karune sending less than 200 words every 4 business days. But even so, we got QA batches every 10 business days at that time, so it evened out. The communication has been there, but it wasn't always meaningful. (with the exception of droughts leading up to Blizzcons, but I digress)

---

Yeah, I saw that thread. I was a bit disappointed I couldn't chime in because it was on EU, and but it was certainly a step forward. Bashioks also said that they're working on some redress on the communities concerns, and the fact that he told us ahead of time was kind of nice.

Overally, it could be seen as getting better, but really, prior to the collective community outburst I didn't see a single thread that constituted "dialogue" since the very beginning of the beta.

I disagree however that the QA batches counted for much. It wasn't communication, it was information. It wasn't a reciprocal process. The information was often criticized as irrelevant. So yeah, it just served to tell the community "we're still doing something". I doubt anything about the QA went past the PR division besides asking a few questions about some unit or feature.

My main issue isn't really about the frequency of blue posts. Rather, the depth of a blue post. I can't think of a single Blue post that detailed the development of anything for example. I'm sure they don't know off the top of their head, blizzards a big company, and I wouldn't expect them to know. (Which creates problems in itself). Blue posts rarely exceed the depth of PR, and what the community is concerned about is what goes on beyond PR. As you said in the article, open dialogue. The Blues play the game, but they should probably be more versed in development as well so the conversations in general can be more deep and more meaningful for both parties. Maybe that might require a expansion of the PR division, but I think at the end it would be a net benefit.

Blizzards stance whenever the community gets angry about something is just to basically let it simmer. Generally, while this creates a kind of distrustful atmosphere, we forgive, because for most of us Blizzard hasn't disappointed. But now Blizzard is certainly in a position to disappoint. In fact, no matter what they do at this point, B-net 2.0 is certainly going to disappoint, I'll be disappointed on the omission of chat channels alone. (I don't foresee them, regardless of how sincerely the they take our feedback, to practically develop chat channels by release). So I think they really need to focus on both ensuring this doesn't happen again and making the community feel like it won't happen again.

Right now, they've made small steps, but it isn't on the level it needs to be. But its helped. For instance, the amount of people "boycotting" (lol, so they say) SC has dropped by 20% in the last week and I think more then the fact everyones sort of just simmering down, the subsequent blue responses both which either were or hinted at (In bashes case) a more deep level of dialogue did help substantially.

I think I found the answer to LoA's msn outcry...

17533 words to be exact

I'll read it for the night and sleep on my own keyboard while i do so :P

Epic article :).

In particular, I really liked the section dealing with cross-regional play, as that is the issue I am most concerned with.

I can only hope that Blizzard reads this article and gives serious reconsideration to their current plans for cross-regional play.

With any luck, Blizzard gives a definitive answer on the matter soon. Even though I am crazy enough to actually contemplate buying a second copy to play in a different region, I'd be very disappointed if I had to :(. I know it's a long shot though, since Blizzard said that cross-regional play is not in their plans for the near future.

I realise that I shouldn't think of this as just a ploy by Blizzard to make more money, but I can't help but be frustrated because I want to get stuck in online in the region of my choice (NA Servers) right from the beginning, when everyone's playing! The longer it takes for cross-regional play to be enabled, the less vibrant the online community will be. Being part in the initial explosion of players for a newly-released RTS game is seriously one of the things I enjoy the most about the genre. :[

At the same time, I have concerns though: I get SOME lag when playing on the NA Servers in the beta (I'm in Australia), but it's still playable. Will the rumours that it'll be significantly worse when playing in the retail version be true? Will it be unplayable? Would I have just wasted $100 for nothing? I wish I knew! Will cross-regional play take only a couple of months to implement? A year? The uncertainty is what's killing me :[. And it's so silly because Blizzard KNOWS that this kind of information will inform our purchase on whether or not we buy more than 1 copy of the game. It's just so easy to get frustrated about this right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The_Blade

I think I found the answer to LoA's msn outcry...

17533 words to be exact

I'll read it for the night and sleep on my own keyboard while i do so :P

---

haha, yea I was wondering what that was about. Now I know.

Very well written article, I hope Blizzard reads it and realizes some of the points that they may have missed.

EDIT

Quote:

---

At the same time, I have concerns though: I get SOME lag when playing on the NA Servers in the beta (I'm in Australia), but it's still playable. Will the rumours that it'll be significantly worse when playing in the retail version be true? Will it be unplayable? Would I have just wasted $100 for nothing? I wish I knew! Will cross-regional play take only a couple of months to implement? A year? The uncertainty is what's killing me :[. And it's so silly because Blizzard KNOWS that this kind of information will inform our purchase on whether or not we buy more than 1 copy of the game. It's just so easy to get frustrated about this right now.

---

The lag will either stay the same or get better with release. The only time it might get bad is release week when everybody is playing at the same time, but everybody may experience lag for that time frame.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gifted

Perhaps a corporate license version of the game can be created by Blizzard, and it could be sold to organizers and companies running major tournaments. This version of the game could include the LAN functionality while disabling Battle.net functionality and features in all forms. The risk of software pirates getting ahold of this corporate license version and duplicating it is valid. However, they would be prevented from interacting with the mainstream of users. There is very little a user can do with a LAN-only game. If a LAN-based option continues to be excluded, there may be adverse affects to the development of e-sports.

---

Just a thought... why would pirates not pirate the "tournament edition" of SC2 with LAN support?

Surely there must be way to have a synchronized encryption system play ping-pong between users playing LAN and Battle Net to allow Blizzard to have its foothold on the consumers while they play latency-free.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Edfishy

Just a thought... why would pirates not pirate the "tournament edition" of SC2 with LAN support?

Surely there must be way to have a synchronized encryption system play ping-pong between users playing LAN and Battle Net to allow Blizzard to have its foothold on the consumers while they play latency-free.

---

We didn't say that our suggestions were the end all - but rather seeds to start the process - we firmly believe there are implementable solutions to our concerns. It's a matter of finding the one that works. If Blizzard believes that the threat of piracy would be too risky then we trust there are other ways to fix it. But I think our thought was that there would be few, licensed copies of this version so any problems would be easy to track down.

~LoA

I read much of the article. good stuff.

i looked but failed t find anything about the lack of cross-regional play's impact upon custom game availability though.

all but the most hardcore maps will only be hosted at the "home region", yet, these players will probably care enough about what they've made to not upload the map externally in order to spread it globally, because this would also enable anyone to access their work and hijack it.

... maybe there will be 3.rd party programs to work around this issue, but i think there'll still be a noteworthy difference in the sets of custom maps available in different regions.

Long long long article... but i read most of it, i agree with everything however, i feel Blizzard really isn't listening to the community and are just making changes on what they think we need. Their publisher Activision Blizzard also has them by the balls, and are finding new whats to get money out of us. In the case of no LAN, that is a way to stop them from losing money to piracy, but over all hurt the community than it does help it. A small authentication before you LAN could have been an easy fix...

Overall battle.net 2.0 is very lackluster, friend book integration is horrible, i guess this will be a step forward for removing internet identity ambiguity, and that doesnt go well with A LOT of people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todie

I read much of the article. good stuff.

i looked but failed t find anything about the lack of cross-regional play's impact upon custom game availability though.

all but the most hardcore maps will only be hosted at the "home region", yet, these players will probably care enough about what they've made to not upload the map externally in order to spread it globally, because this would also enable anyone to access their work and hijack it.

... maybe there will be 3.rd party programs to work around this issue, but i think there'll still be a noteworthy difference in the sets of custom maps available in different regions.

---

That's a good point Todie, and unfortunately our article, though in depth, is not conclusive. Every minute after we posted it, we realize new suggestions, ideas and concerns popping up that could have been inserted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todie

I read much of the article. good stuff.

i looked but failed t find anything about the lack of cross-regional play's impact upon custom game availability though.

all but the most hardcore maps will only be hosted at the "home region", yet, these players will probably care enough about what they've made to not upload the map externally in order to spread it globally, because this would also enable anyone to access their work and hijack it.

... maybe there will be 3.rd party programs to work around this issue, but i think there'll still be a noteworthy difference in the sets of custom maps available in different regions.

---

Actually, I do remember seeing it in the article. It's right here:

Quote:

---

Players are unable test out newfound strategies against strangers in a different country, join an interesting custom game that was made in another region, and meet new friends through the multiplayer experience.

---

VL.DR -> very long, did read.

For me as a player I am mostly concerned how the "chat / identifiers" and accesability for a group of people will work (the group of people is not neccecary in a party)

Next to that is how the "statistics / search" will work the current divion matchup isn't exactly great, and there is no way to measure how "you are doing" or challaning other players. You can't even create your own division among friends which I thought was something they were really going to implent in 2.0. Also custom games got similar problems with searching for them and looking for popularity only, naming is also a problem. I once got placed with the same players I played with earlier, and I really did NOT want to play with them again, but I had to because they had the only created map (and it took so long to fill a game, creating my own would just take sooooo looooooooong time)

Maybe they have been really looking at the gameplay to much, I mean that can be altered later if they really need to (and they don't need any huge changes there atm, but the interface and how the menus and the platform itself works needs to be reworked alot)

Great article, and it covers a lot of the things and situations the community sees. Of course it doesn't cover all, but so far it's a very good start.

This should be sent by Blizzard and I hope they are going to give a real attention to it. I know they are having TONS of feedback and it's hard to separate the good feedback from the bad and where to draw a line about the community ideas. We are tons of fans that publish those ideas, and thus we _all_ have different ideas that often contradicts.

Blizzard is in my opinion loosing their open channel communication with the community, well not loosing but it's over-crowed. What should be done is to hear different community websites that are re-known for their "well-done" articles or arguments.

Guys I implore you, send this to Blizzard, make sure your ideas are heard and, keep us informed about what Blizzard is saying about this...

Congratulation to all people who took part about the writing of that.

You speak as if this isn't already sent <.< >.>

^_^

Very good job, i am pleased to see someone - or a lot of people ^^ - writing a intelligent essay about what the community really want and not child whining. I am also happy that you sent it to blizzard in a correct form like this. You are putting a step further than the cat video^^.

I am 100% with you on this, VERY good job!

Two things...

First...this article is superbly researched, constructed and written. Bravo. You guys nailed every concern with well-crafted and fair minded arguments. And I appreciated the way you explained the predicament Blizzard and the community are in with regard to communication. Games that hope to push e-sports and enhance the online multiplayer experience can no longer be developed in a vacuum. It really should be a community effort.

Two...Just out of curiosity, how exactly was this puppy sent to Blizzard? FedExed leather-bound, hard copy? E-mail? Fax? Something else entirely?

I especially liked the way you approached the Cross-regional play aspect of bnet and the interface, as well as how hollow some of the promises at Blizzcon sound now. You both nailed the issues in such an articulate way, it makes me want to kiss both of you lol! and I'm not gay, so that's saying a lot!

Cross-regional play is definitely the issue that concerns me the most due to how it really segregates an already connected community in a way that was not even foreseen before the new Bnet was unveiled. And the fact that they promised it in the works (and was later bumped down the priority list) makes Blizzard's bnet team look a little unprofessional. You have a roadmap planned - stick to it. Don't get distracted by company politics (which is what I though the FB integration was). It is a good thing they made it optional, but I think they should have focussed more on the more pressing bnet issues that you guys BEAUTIFULLY expressed in this Article.

I don't know if it is the right thing to do, but I am really really feeling the urge to Promote this article on every forum/game-site I am related to, including the Battle.net Beta forums. What do you suggest? Yay or Nay?

In our humble opinion, the more that this type of feedback is consumed - the more likely Blizzard will be to take it to heart!

~LoA

Good read. Being constructive and not treating Blizzard as idiots is key for good feedback.

One objective of this article is to encourage intelligent discussion among community members and partners, so I'm thrilled to see some of the insightful feedback beginning to flow through this thread. As other staff members have stated, this article (this thread) is intended to be the springboard for respectful discussion of features.

Re: CCP

It's interesting that CCP is mentioned. Crowd Control Productions (CCP), the Icelandic developer of sandbox space-MMO Eve Online, is respected for the continuous improvement to their product. CCP has pioneered many aspects of MMO development, and EVE is beginning to garner many player and industry awards as it matures. There are, of course, many flaws apparent in how they make games, but I feel CCP's relentless improvement and consistent community involvement are useful examples to the gaming industry at-large.

Nice to hear that Gifted's wall of text dealt his own self terrible terrible damage. :p I glanced over it, and it seems to be pretty comprehensive. I'm gonna have to read this in full later, however. Got some things to do out and about. I hope it turns some heads at Blizzard. :D

It's not just my wall of text. ^_^ The staff contributed as a whole, and to some significant degree without your knowledge, the community.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gifted

It's not just my wall of text. ^_^ The staff contributed as a whole, and to some significant degree without your knowledge, the community.

---

Oh I know. I'm just talking about that one part where it said you fell asleep at the wheel. Good thing you managed to stay on the road :D

btw, has this been linked on the official forums yet? If it hasn't, I'd like to do the honors.

lol me first!!

j/k I suggested it, but so far the response about consumption seems scromptuous to say the least :D

I don't care really, but if you want to go ahead, otherwise I will do it with pleasure!

** crackles knuckles **

I've just finished reading this wonderful article! It's very well written and clear. I've found that I agree with everything you wrote and I've found some issues that I've hadn't thought about. Thank you for this piece and for having synthesized our common concerns.
Getting on topic I think that the current friend system isn't flexible enough and requires you to share too much info. I've liked your suggestion on using Name.Account because this way I can have many aliases, but still be unique in every Blizzard's game. It should be enough for making stable friends in a game and have an option in your battle.net account to choose if have the same list of friend in all your games and for all your aliases or to filter someone out as you wish.
Second I think your widget idea for the home page is good and I'll suggest to make some info mandatory for everyone, as patch info, game news, blizzard news, tournaments. Maybe have a list with your friends online would be great too.
Lastly I fully agree that custom maps system needs an effective search and filtering system and that it could be categorized in an evolving way. Now Blizzard already knows which are the most common types in SC and WC3 and then, when new maps get popular, they can add more types.

Posted it here:
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html...74495&sid=5000

I'd like to just say thanks to those who worked on this article and adressed my concerns in a more polite way that I would do it.
Thanks and I hope it will work

Very good read, grats to all SC:L staff who put effort into that. I am hoping Blizzard QA department will take a look at it.

I'm still so disappointed in the direction Blizzard chose to go with Battle.net 2.0. I was expecting all the same features from the old version with just more new goodies and a cool new interface. Seems I was wrong.

Very nice article.

I feel like I've just read the ramblings of a mastermind, which is both good and bad.
Length was very excessive, should have been trimmed dramatically. Live and learn, please don't do that in the future.

However, in the end the article still is the best analysis of B.NET 2 out there, if you can read through it. Nothing was left untouched, I hope someone at Blizz gets to this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hamshank

Length was very excessive, should have been trimmed dramatically. Live and learn, please don't do that in the future.

---

While you are correct in that it could have been reduced further, the reality is that this article is detailed. Consequently, the addition of details comes with length. We haven't "lived and learned," for this article is highly intentional; we made conscious decisions about length. I feel that some aspects of this article remain a little too explicit and extensive, but that is the reality of productions of this size.

Props for typing this up. You're doing an important job to make sure Blizzard understands what we need and how much we want it.