Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Truth About B.Net 2.0

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Truth About B.Net 2.0

    If you guys (yes, the few who ever look here) haven't already seen these 2 amazingly detailed posts over at TL, they deal with revealing the absolute **** pile that is about to emerge from Activision Blizzard.

    Blizzard:"No plans for chatrooms, crossrealm play"

    A short history of Activision Blizzard or how B.Net 2.0 came to be

    Personally, I hate the way B.Net 2.0 is coming along as it seems like (and is essentially 100% proven in the second link) that Activision Blizzard simply doesn't care for the consumer anymore. They only care about the $$$$ and nothing else. Give both those links a good read through and make your voice heard (links as to how at the bottom of the first link's main post).

    Here's a little teaser for you...
    Originally posted by D3xter
    September 15, 2009: At the “Deutsche Bank Security Technology Conference”, Kotick holds his best public speech yet: http://www.geeks.co.uk/7282-activisi...heap-games-you

    In the last cycle of videogames you spent $50 on a game, played it and took it back to the shop for credit. Today, we’ll (charge) $100 for a guitar. You might add a microphone or drums; you might buy two or three expansions packs, different types of music. Over the life of your ownership you’ll probably buy around 25 additional song packs in digital downloads. So, what used to be a $50 sale is a $500 sale today.
    Most of the 20 years, that I have provided for growth at Activision, we were content to make products that are attractive to the 16-35 year old guy who has gotten no date for Saturday night.
    As he works himself up to his personal masterpiece…

    Kotick noted that in the past he changed the employee incentive program so that it "really rewards profit and nothing else." He continued, "You have studio heads who five years ago didn't know the difference between a balance sheet and a bed sheet who are now arguing allocations in our CFO's office pretty regularly. ... We have a real culture of thrift. The goal that I had in bringing a lot of the packaged goods folks into Activision about 10 years ago was to take all the fun out of making video games."
    Yes, he just said that.

    Ultimately, Kotick doesn't want his employees to take anything for granted. They should always be aware of "skepticism, pessimism, and fear" in the midst of the global economic downturn. "We are very good at keeping people focused on the deep depression," he said.

    Damnit Blizzard, fix ZvT already >.<
    In Soviet Russian, Arma admins are nice to you!

  • #2
    Re: The Truth About B.Net 2.0

    They do not have plans for chatrooms and crossrealm play yet. They did not say they were opposed to the idea of implementing it if there is a strong enough desire for it from the community.

    As far as Activision goes, Blizzard is a strong company and I doubt they will allow Activision to tarnish their products. Blizzard will still be Blizzard and they will always have the same production model. Their aim is quality, unlike EA, who produces fast games for profit and then moves on to a new title without fixing the previous games.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The Truth About B.Net 2.0

      I don't doubt the quality in the game itself but their instead their business model as to how they're handling B.Net 2.0. I don't mind getting the expansions (as long as they are lower than $30 at launch for people who've already owned the first game) at their individual prices but I don't like the idea of having to pay for anything in B.Net. I want my initial purchase to buy EVERYTHING in the game. This is why I'm so strongly against the CoD series now as they are charging for map packs which aren't of any decent quality (custom FREE maps are typically much better). I don't want to be paying for a single thing except the main game itself and having to pay after dishing out your $60 is ripping off the customer.

      I'm also not liking the tone of the responses from Blizzard as they aren't professional or polite at all. Instead, it seems as if they really couldn't care less and it is just a waste of their time.

      Damnit Blizzard, fix ZvT already >.<
      In Soviet Russian, Arma admins are nice to you!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The Truth About B.Net 2.0

        Seeing all the bad news coming out of ... well everywhere (Bnet forums, TL, YT, gaming sites) really sucks. However, like every major game release there is going to be controversy over these kinds of things. I hope the release at the end of July will give live up to the huge expectations of the gaming community. Also, since this is expected from a beta (the last few open beta's didn't go over so well except for HON's), as always, its a wait and see at release kind of thing. The only difference this time is that people pre-ordered to be in the beta so they feel entitled to talk about it in this way.
        Last edited by Avs; 06-02-2010, 12:35 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The Truth About B.Net 2.0

          I react with nothing but pessimism with anything that Activision now touches. Be optimistic if you choose so. I'll temper myself for an outrageous disappointment.

          Activision is basically now of one mind: to fleece you of your money in every single possible way you can imagine.

          I fully expect to be disappointed by the direction Diablo III will be taken.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The Truth About B.Net 2.0

            While I was not at all impressed the the bnet presented to us in beta, my game is already paid for, and will remain so. I enjoyed the gameplay and at the end of the day that is what matters to me. Personally don't care for lan, chat channels or cross realm play myself, but those features should be there as many people care for them. Funny thing is, there is nothing stopping a NA player from making an asian bnet account and playing there. Essentially you need multiple cd keys to play on different servers, which is bs. I am buying the initial game, and if I see that Blizzard is further trying to milk me with a poor product through custom material and expansions, this will be a short lived game for me.


            I love gaming, mmmmmmmm

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The Truth About B.Net 2.0

              No chat rooms? Tough cookies. Let's compare linking up with friends and groups, clans, etc. in Battle.net 2.0 vs. Battle.net 1.0:
              In Starcraft 2 I click open my friends list and send my friend a message, oop a clansman comes online, I'll add him to our conversation and have a three way. Another friend comes on, added. I join a game and I'm able to talk to everyone in game.
              In Warcraft 3 I want to join a friends game. Sorry you can't. There's no direct method of joining on a friend. Heck just to see my friends I have to open up a chat room list, join a chat room, navigate to my friends list then join their chat room. Given all this I still can't private message them easily or join their game.

              Which system is better? If chat rooms are wanted that badly then I'm sure Blizzard will add them in. We're talking about a solid game company who listens to it's customers. Crossrelm play was never on the plate, it simply doesn't make sense. You can choose which realm you connect to, but gamers in Australia using my realm servers are bad enough as it is. I don't want cross realm play. Like the guy said, it's not there yet in terms of technology.

              I didn't find anything about the guy's responses to be snarky. It's short and succinct, everything that an e-mail interview is meant to be.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The Truth About B.Net 2.0

                See, bnet 2.0 may be fine for you and me. We come online, game a bit with our buddies, all is peachy. However the current system is not friendly for setting up tournaments with strangers, playing with others around the world. There are instances where this system just doesn't cut it (primarily in scenarios where the people you want to game with are not your friends - nor do you necessarily want them to be). Seems they have tailored to the more casual crowd (which suits me and my needs). I think they are mostly catching flack because people are attributing every bad move or lack of a feature with Activision and its money grubbing hands (and maybe some of these concerns are valid).

                We will see whether they listen to the "community", so far they have displayed they are reading what the community is saying, but not necessarily listening to it.


                I love gaming, mmmmmmmm

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The Truth About B.Net 2.0

                  Originally posted by Polska View Post
                  See, bnet 2.0 may be fine for you and me. We come online, game a bit with our buddies, all is peachy. However the current system is not friendly for setting up tournaments with strangers, playing with others around the world. There are instances where this system just doesn't cut it (primarily in scenarios where the people you want to game with are not your friends - nor do you necessarily want them to be). Seems they have tailored to the more casual crowd (which suits me and my needs). I think they are mostly catching flack because people are attributing every bad move or lack of a feature with Activision and its money grubbing hands (and maybe some of these concerns are valid).

                  We will see whether they listen to the "community", so far they have displayed they are reading what the community is saying, but not necessarily listening to it.
                  Okay that's a fair argument. But Blizzard has the ability to sponsor their own tournaments or provide a special ladder for the occasional tournaments they run. Who knows with clans you might be able to run your own clan vs. clan ladder of sorts. I like the system they have now. Much better matchmaking for those of us that suck vs. those of us that don't. It allows me to fairly compete with others. I view it as two steps forward and one step back. For a long time I just couldn't get into blizzard's RTSs online. I'd play the custom game modes or play occasionally with a friend but it was no fun either wise. This makes it much more accessible.

                  Blizzard has a very good track record of listening to their community, but they never half ass things. Look at WoW, they're still adding features and adding very polished aspects to the game. They just patched Diablo 2 and added respecs which so many people have been begging for. Right now though their top priority though is to push out a very well polished game next month. Adding in chat rooms is not at the top of their priority list. Adding in every thing else, making sure it works, etc. is so much more important. Chat rooms is something that they can always patch in. The game hasn't been released even. Give Blizzard some time. You can't make demands of a company and expect instant gratification.

                  Comment

                  Connect

                  Collapse

                  TeamSpeak 3 Server

                  Collapse

                  Advertisement

                  Collapse

                  Twitter Feed

                  Collapse

                  Working...
                  X