Husky Video: The State of BNET 2.0

[SaZun]

Didnt war3 have a very similar matchmaking system?

Not sure on that one. I would win a few but then play people on what seemed like a win% basis. Then I'd be stomped for a long time until I played people below my skill level again. That and I never played anyone near the same level as me.

[GRUNT]

More than chat rooms or LAN, or the funky friend system (which I'm sure is going to get revamped anyway), I want cross-region play .

I'd be grateful for just that.

[n00bonicPlague]

Yeah, I really don't understand why they got rid of the identifier system.

Now we gotta do all this email crap and whatnot.

[Eligor]

More than chat rooms or LAN, or the funky friend system (which I'm sure is going to get revamped anyway), I want cross-region play .

I'd be grateful for just that.

Indeed, region lock is the one truly detrimental decision Blizzard made. There's no good reason why it should exist (except for such mercantile matters as microtransactions) and many good reasons why it shouldn't.

[Maul]

Not another thread...

[SaZun]

This one has gone into a little less spiteful direction.

[flabortast]

Kittens alongside fairly constructive criticism. What's not to love?

[GnaReffotsirk]

Taps shield.

[mr. peasant]

I think a lot of the issues with communication have to do not with the FREQUENCY of posts, but rather the CONTENT those posts were communicating.

Hearing "Yes Galaxy Editor CAN _____" for the umpteenth time in a row may have been great at the time (and I emphasize 'may'), but now that we look back on it, it would have done that whether we'd asked about it or not, whereas stuff like what Blizz is finally doing now with these Patch insights, where they share their thoughts behind design decisions... if they'd done THAT from the start, we'd have made a lot more headway.

I'm sorry, but 'headway' and 'insights'? You're making it sound as if you think that the community was an active contributor to the game's development balance-wise during alpha. The truth is that we weren't. We are not game designers, let alone Blizzard employees. Therefore, Theorycrafting and our thoughts on gameplay decisions are not routinely taken onboard.

Rather, they kept going on about the Editor's capabilities because it was a positive feedback mechanism. That was an area where our comments and wants can and were actively being taken up. Knowing what the community wants here would have helped the game designers figure out what needed to be developed and streamlined. The same would probably have been done for Battlenet 2.0 and in-game graphics.

In other words, where fan feedback would have been more listened to early on would be in the game's aesthetics and support systems.

[pure.Wasted]

I'm sorry, but 'headway' and 'insights'? You're making it sound as if you think that the community was an active contributor to the game's development balance-wise during alpha. The truth is that we weren't. We are not game designers, let alone Blizzard employees. Therefore, Theorycrafting and our thoughts on gameplay decisions are not routinely taken onboard.

Remember how Corruptors had this sweet-ass "Corrupt" ability that allowed them to infest enemy air units? And then all of a sudden they didn't have it? And then like 5 months later, when it's way too late for us to throw new ideas at Blizzard, they decide to tell us WHY they changed it?

I'm not saying they HAVE to listen to our suggestions... I'm saying they (or anyone in their position) would be foolish not to. And if they'd told us what the problem was right away, in this case and many others, we could have given them a lot more specific ideas narrowed down to find the solution for an existing problem than a staff of 10, 20, even 50 people can come up with.

Because they didn't, we're stuck with Corruptors that don't corrupt and Infestors that don't infest, among other unfortunate absurdities.