Mod EDIT:In english: http://www.incgamers.com/Videos/763/StarCraft-2-Developer-Interview Pay attention to the part around 8 minutes where he says they won't have multiplayer replays at ship -_______- Yes, they say they would like to add it later, and they'll still have reps that you can watch on your own, but watching replays with friends is 10x as fun. So fucking weak =[ Paraphrased:
On the replay side, there's probably not gonna be a facility to do that [watch them with others] at launch, but we'd love to do that in the future.
-FrozenArbiter
In another topic someone mentioned an interview with Chris Sigaty. I noticed this interview on that same website and I don't think I've seen it elsewhere.
It's in German, so I included a version by Google Translate.
In the week of 22 - June 28, we were at Blizzard in Irvine to visit. In America we have some interviews with famous StarCraft 2 developers brought for you.
Question: When I right click on a player do, I can then click "ignore" represent? Or anflüstern[whisper] him?
Rob Pardo:
Wow, it must I think. I can not exactly all right-click options remember, but I think there is a possibility right click on someone to whisper.
Question: Is there anything that you would like to change, but it can not because of Battle.net?
Rob Pardo:
Let me think there is something that we want to change? We still have some challenges. We want e.g. the performance or increase the minimum system even further down the key. But what game features side, we are now quite happy. Of course there are always a few little things, but not based on lack of time. It is not that we would say "with more time we could solve this problem," that it relates more to matters of taste.
Question: How many portrait animations have you for a single unit planned?
Rob Pardo:
I have no idea! * laughs * But Sammy could know. The content is rather a question to our team of artists. * laughs *
Question: Is there something in StarCraft 2 where you think that you are personally a big help you?
Rob Pardo:
There are a lot of things. But it is difficult to answer. Often my ideas merge with those of the rest of the team and vice versa. Also I do not think this way. And often I am not the only one who has a certain idea. Ideas evolve just often in small teams, such as the avenger with his ability to jump over cliffs. Therefore I can not exactly tell you "this and that is my idea."
Question: How many speakers are in the dialogues of the campaign to hear?
Rob Pardo:
Wow, but it really tricky questions! * laughs * That I do not know exactly. It sounds like a question Russle who knew das But I will not even guess, the whole units alone ... And yet even then the characters. Moreover, often several units of a speaker talking even while the characters have their own spokesperson.
Question: Ok, we remain in singleplayer. You were already on the first part involved. We can see that the bonus missions already allusions to events in the future are made. Did you already had a plan how the story should go forward?
Rob Pardo:
We had no complete plan. We definitely had a rough plan what could happen. As Broodwar nearly 11 years came out, we talked of course about the Story of Starcraft 2nd In addition, it should also give books. So we have like so many times together and our rough outline of the story through. What units do we want to see? What kind of characters we want to see? All things just so.
Question: Let us about the missions editor talking.
Rob Pardo:
On the, we are really proud. We have a lot of work put into it and want all the people can do what she also in Warcraft 3 can do. We want for Starcraft 2 have the same progress as Starcraft 1 to Warcraft 3rd We want this time also the better support Battle.net. We want e.g. Maps showing which are most popular and such a thing.
Question: Is it possible for me to invite a friend to replay the same or look in my game einzuklinken?
Rob Pardo:
We make it safe for observers games. The players want to have something simple. We will not make head games, because it could lead to tampering. In the replays, it would be stupid as soon as the release of the game, but that will come later, perhaps. Just for clarification: Of course we have to release replays, but replays the invitation to be still not be there.[I assume this means you can't join a game that's already in progress.]
Question: Will Battle.net be free or there are a few small fee features?
Rob Pardo:
This comes on the region. In Europe, something similar to as in the past. The largest part, well, everything will be in vain[free]. In Asia, could run a little differently. It will provide certain features for which you pay. Take a look at the whole of World of Warcraft. There must be for certain things, such as Server transfers paid. So it is perhaps something for Battle.net, but we want to be sure that the full width of the Battle.net can use if you just buy the game.
Question: Many players may like to view VODs. In some games like GTA, there is an opportunity for players VODs incorporated. Do you plan something for Starcraft 2?
Rob Pardo:
That was a feature, which we gladly would have done, but it then has not worked. We had this cool idea from the replay editor, something we will perhaps in an attempt addon[expansion], but it is probably not in the release version included. You will VODs still the traditional way to create and publish them.
Question: In Warcraft 3, there are rewards. Do you plan something for the new Battle.net, or in particular for Starcraft 2?
Rob Pardo:
There will be rewards for the singleplayer and the Battle.Net give. But the rewards from the singleplayer need to get into Battle.Net login.
Question: How will this work? Does it actually in the singleplayer Battle.net? Or do you just log in and then goes into the normal singleplayer?
Rob Pardo:
We want to encourage people to move with the community to be associated even if they play the singleplayer. I mean, it is not mandatory, you can also complete the singleplayer offline play. If you e.g. a friend did while playing the singleplayer but still connected, you can still write to him, etc.
Question: Is there a possibility of Starcraft in LAN mode to play? E.g. Dream on the console hack?
Rob Pardo:
We have no plans for a LAN mode support. Who wants to play in multiplayer have to use Battle.Net.
Question: Ok, so this is similar to Diablo3.
Rob Pardo:
Exactly.
Question: It is said that it will be possible a few Protoss missions in Wings of Liberty play.
Rob Pardo:
Ähh, yes. In the Wings of Liberty campaign, 95% Terran missions. But we have a small addition to the story itself revolves around the Protoss. There it is possible to Protoss missions to play. But these are really very few compared to the Terran missions.
Question: You said that there is no LAN will support. If you always have to be online, what is the minimum requirement on the Internet?
Rob Pardo:
I'm not sure honestly. I think we still have no limit. "As low as it goes" * smiles * I think we do similar to the graphic requirements. We look forward to what people have to try and 90% of people to reach.
Question: So it is quite low at the end be?
Rob Pardo:
Jap.
Question: Do you plan something like a league with live commentary, etc.?
Rob Pardo:
Yes, of course, we have made for Warcraft 3 and we will of course our future games at least as much support as the former.
Question: Will it also give Baltte.Net tournaments in which players can be created?
Rob Pardo:
The times we originally wanted to have, we have talked about. We will not have from the beginning. At the beginning we started the first of Rob Pardoard-wire system.
Question: How high is the chance that Rob Pardoard Starcraft 2 even on a game console rausbringt?
Rob Pardo:
0%. We want the game as well as it is and then look for which platforms are suitable. We can simply not imagine that a real-time strategy titles such as Starcraft 2 in the same quality on a console could publish. We had tried Starcraft 1 on the N64 to publish, it is still playable, but it is something quite different than on the PC. And this difference is not what we want.
Question: Many players do not play on the Battle.Net but ICCup. Will you such additional servers for StarCraft 2 permit?
Rob Pardo:
No. This is partly the reason why we do not allow LAN games. We want all players on Battle.Net play and that this is a great game experience. If people have a reason not to want to play Battle.Net We want to improve Battle.Net.
Question: They use their own modified version of Battle.Net.
Rob Pardo:
That is even worse. * laughs * This is called a pirate service.
Question: Do you have a plan replays should be supporting that you make a click somewhere and it is because Replaypack Battle.Net on a page or YouTube or something to load?
Rob Pardo:
We want to make something. They think we are still after. But we can not replay in an AVI file or something to convert. But that would be cool.
Question: Is there such thing as a replay client that only replays can play?
Rob Pardo:
I know what you are talking about. But this is something that we do not want. Warcraft 3 was the big problem that replays are not compatible with other versions of the game were. You play as a game, save the replay and then we patch the game. The old replay would no longer be playable. And we definitely want to improve. It should not be important in what version of the game the replay was saved. You should always be able to play.
Question: Let us a little about the Battle.Net talk. This alternative Battle.net which we have spoken to has a slightly different ranking system than Battle.net, which is very popular. Do you think about this other ranking system in the new Battle.net to use?
Rob Pardo:
We have an entirely new system for Battle.net. We also have no problem with other people who have a different system want. They are merely playing on Battle.net.
Question: How many missions did actually the Terran campaign?
Rob Pardo:
The Terran campaign is about as big as the 3 campaigns of StarCraft 1 together. However, I can not exactly tell you how many missions they keep ready for you, because you so choose your own missions can. It depends so entirely on player. But overall, we have about 30 missions of which you can choose.
Question: And how long does it approximately to the campaign go through?
Rob Pardo:
Well, that depends on how well you play. * laughs * I'd say anything from 30 to 60 hours. Depending on how much time you can be everything to explore and consider how you're the enemy to completely destroy it. I think if you would try a new time record, perhaps you would need 20 hours, if you already know everything, etc. A little guidance is perhaps that you have any missions for about 30 to 60 minutes will.
Yes this is a interview from our site, too. But we didn't translate it because there were several english sites that should release an english version of this Interview soon (e.g. starcraftwire.com)
But anyways you can read it from the Google Translate as well, but as you all know this isn't as good as an real translation
This interview was interesting. He somehow doesnt reveal anything new that Will help with the B.net "problem" we have atm with latency, but just saying that they'd rather improve the experience than allow people to play through LAN and what not.
This is soo anti piracy and nothing else. I really hope that when they release all data on B.net2 that it will be as good as hoped, otherwise I will feel abit disappointed =/
Dustin already said that it will be routed similar as Warcraft 3, hence if you are all on LAN it will be routed through the LAN also. You will just authenticate to Battlenet.
Wow. What happened to releasing a complete and polished game? First customizable hotkeys, now this. And who knows how long of a list exists for things they plan to work out during beta, such as latency issues. Is beta going to last as long as it needs to or is that list just going to get cut short when the deadline comes?
I really just can't understand how these two statements coexist: "We won't give a release date because we're not going to release it until it's ready and we don't know when that is." "We like that feature and we want it to be in the game but it won't be there at release."
Even if you say that they can't have everything that they want at release or the game will never be released, there's such a thing called polish. The more things in at release, especially things that people definitely expect from a 2009/2010 RTS, the more polished the game is and the bigger the initial wave will be.
Wow. What happened to releasing a complete and polished game? First customizable hotkeys, now this. And who knows how long of a list exists for things they plan to work out during beta, such as latency issues. Is beta going to last as long as it needs to or is that list just going to get cut short when the deadline comes?
I really just can't understand how these two statements coexist: "We won't give a release date because we're not going to release it until it's ready and we don't know when that is." "We like that feature and we want it to be in the game but it won't be there at release."
Even if you say that they can't have everything that they want at release or the game will never be released, there's such a thing called polish. The more things in at release, especially things that people definitely expect from a 2009/2010 RTS, the more polished the game is and the bigger the initial wave will be.
On July 05 2009 05:26 Zzoram wrote: Wait, I have been watching replays on Battle.net in Starcraft Broodwar for years. Is he saying that they're taking that out now?
You just host a game, and pick the replay as the map. Other people join, download the replay, then you can start.
Taking out and not making launch are two different things.
Wow. What happened to releasing a complete and polished game? First customizable hotkeys, now this. And who knows how long of a list exists for things they plan to work out during beta, such as latency issues. Is beta going to last as long as it needs to or is that list just going to get cut short when the deadline comes?
I really just can't understand how these two statements coexist: "We won't give a release date because we're not going to release it until it's ready and we don't know when that is." "We like that feature and we want it to be in the game but it won't be there at release."
Even if you say that they can't have everything that they want at release or the game will never be released, there's such a thing called polish. The more things in at release, especially things that people definitely expect from a 2009/2010 RTS, the more polished the game is and the bigger the initial wave will be.
While this is starting to get very annoying to me with some of the features they've decided to not include at release they however at some point have to say enough is enough. The fact is when you get down to it if they included everything they wanted to in the original we would be waiting till 2012 to get a lesser form of the game, I don't consider that acceptable. I would rather a release in 09 with most of the features and then the rest of the features get patched in/added in with expansions, development is done better this way as you have the option of changing things around when you see how the public reacts to some things.
When you have as much freedom with time schedules as blizzard does it takes a great developer to know when to say the game is finished and release it as there are always things that can be improved on however if you don't do this you end up with duke nukem forever.
Wow. What happened to releasing a complete and polished game? First customizable hotkeys, now this. And who knows how long of a list exists for things they plan to work out during beta, such as latency issues. Is beta going to last as long as it needs to or is that list just going to get cut short when the deadline comes?
I really just can't understand how these two statements coexist: "We won't give a release date because we're not going to release it until it's ready and we don't know when that is." "We like that feature and we want it to be in the game but it won't be there at release."
Even if you say that they can't have everything that they want at release or the game will never be released, there's such a thing called polish. The more things in at release, especially things that people definitely expect from a 2009/2010 RTS, the more polished the game is and the bigger the initial wave will be.
While this is starting to get very annoying to me with some of the features they've decided to not include at release they however at some point have to say enough is enough. The fact is when you get down to it if they included everything they wanted to in the original we would be waiting till 2012 to get a lesser form of the game, I don't consider that acceptable. I would rather a release in 09 with most of the features and then the rest of the features get patched in/added in with expansions, development is done better this way as you have the option of changing things around when you see how the public reacts to some things.
When you have as much freedom with time schedules as blizzard does it takes a great developer to know when to say the game is finished and release it as there are always things that can be improved on however if you don't do this you end up with duke nukem forever.
The thing is, how exactly is bnet 2.0 going to "amaze me" when it doesn't even have BASIC features like watching replays online (not being able to do that killed WC3 for me btw)? There's no LAN, there's no usermade tournaments (for release), infact, so far they haven't mentioned anything cool that will be in, only things I expected to be in that won't.
Yeah, they say they want to add it and hopefully they will (SC didn't even have replays at all when it launched after all, but that was in 1998!!), but I'm still disappointed, and it's still gonna hurt reviews (or at least, it should).
what the hell is happening to my favorite company Blizzard?
I could understand the no LAN feature (especially as long as you're still able to play through LAN after connecting to bnet), but the 'no customizable hotkeys by launch but hopefully in the future' really had me worried.. why can't they include this by launch? Especially since they had it for WC3's launch
and now not being able to watch replays on b.net by launch 'but we'd like to add it at some point' ???? what?
Battle.net 2.0 is supposed to be a completely revamped and improved awesome new battle.net right? And yet they can't include something as simple as watching replays with friends, a feature that has been in for a decade for SC, super-ghetto Battle.net?
Is it because they haven't really used that feature and don't know how much people have loved it for SC, so they put it on the back burner? If so, then we as a community need to let them know how important it is to us
On July 05 2009 05:57 Zelniq wrote: what the hell is happening to my favorite company Blizzard?
I could understand the no LAN feature (especially as long as you're still able to play through LAN after connecting to bnet), but the 'no customizable hotkeys by launch but hopefully in the future' really had me worried.. why can't they include this by launch? Especially since they had it for WC3's launch
and now not being able to watch replays on b.net by launch 'but we'd like to add it at some point' ???? what?
Battle.net 2.0 is supposed to be a completely revamped and improved awesome new battle.net right? And yet they can't include something as simple as watching replays with friends, a feature that has been in for a decade for SC, super-ghetto Battle.net?
Is it because they haven't really used that feature and don't know how much people have loved it for SC, so they put it on the back burner? If so, then we as a community need to let them know how important it is to us
Indeed, all these constant features cuts are starting to get annoying. Customizable hotkeys wasn't a big deal, but no custom tournaments was bad, and no online replays is just getting ridiculous. It's starting to remind me of how DoW2 was just a skeleton at release and expected the fans to just swallow it and wait for patchs, and most didn't. Blizzard is really pushing their luck here.
Watch the video before you start begin fear-mongering, they said they don't have replay watching with more than one person at the same time. Also, the other feature that won't make its way into the original game is a replay editor, not replays.
Tip of the Day!: Translations of an interview that was translated to another language do not lend themselves to accuracy.
Wow. What happened to releasing a complete and polished game? First customizable hotkeys, now this. And who knows how long of a list exists for things they plan to work out during beta, such as latency issues. Is beta going to last as long as it needs to or is that list just going to get cut short when the deadline comes?
I really just can't understand how these two statements coexist: "We won't give a release date because we're not going to release it until it's ready and we don't know when that is." "We like that feature and we want it to be in the game but it won't be there at release."
Even if you say that they can't have everything that they want at release or the game will never be released, there's such a thing called polish. The more things in at release, especially things that people definitely expect from a 2009/2010 RTS, the more polished the game is and the bigger the initial wave will be.
While this is starting to get very annoying to me with some of the features they've decided to not include at release they however at some point have to say enough is enough. The fact is when you get down to it if they included everything they wanted to in the original we would be waiting till 2012 to get a lesser form of the game, I don't consider that acceptable. I would rather a release in 09 with most of the features and then the rest of the features get patched in/added in with expansions, development is done better this way as you have the option of changing things around when you see how the public reacts to some things.
When you have as much freedom with time schedules as blizzard does it takes a great developer to know when to say the game is finished and release it as there are always things that can be improved on however if you don't do this you end up with duke nukem forever.
The thing is, how exactly is bnet 2.0 going to "amaze me" when it doesn't even have BASIC features like watching replays online (not being able to do that killed WC3 for me btw)? There's no LAN, there's no usermade tournaments (for release), infact, so far they haven't mentioned anything cool that will be in, only things I expected to be in that won't.
Yeah, they say they want to add it and hopefully they will (SC didn't even have replays at all when it launched after all, but that was in 1998!!), but I'm still disappointed, and it's still gonna hurt reviews (or at least, it should).
I agree completely although until we hear exactly what battle.net 2.0 has to offer im gonna hold my tongue. In the end I think this is all activisions doing.
Question: In Warcraft 3, there are rewards. Do you plan something for the new Battle.net, or in particular for Starcraft 2?
Rob Pardo:
There will be rewards for the singleplayer and the Battle.Net give. But the rewards from the singleplayer need to get into Battle.Net login.
Question: How will this work? Does it actually in the singleplayer Battle.net? Or do you just log in and then goes into the normal singleplayer?
Rob Pardo:
We want to encourage people to move with the community to be associated even if they play the singleplayer. I mean, it is not mandatory, you can also complete the singleplayer offline play. If you e.g. a friend did while playing the singleplayer but still connected, you can still write to him, etc.
On July 05 2009 06:05 Yenzilla wrote: Watch the video before you start begin fear-mongering, they said they don't have replay watching with more than one person at the same time. Also, the other feature that won't make its way into the original game is a replay editor, not replays.
Tip of the Day!: Translations of an interview that was translated to another language do not lend themselves to accuracy.
That's exactly what I did, and exactly what my problem is - watching replays alone SUCKS BALLS compared to watching with someone else.
I just realized that after all this time and all these patches for Warcraft 3, they never added in support for watching replays online either.. clearly this is linked. they never put it in for WC3 so why would they include it with SC2? they must not think people care about this feature
we must let them know that yes we do and it's a big deal for a lot of us
I know some people that did not get into WC3 in part due to not having replays watchable online (as FA just claimed as well), it's been such a big part of the b.net experience for BW.. it's hard to live without it
Wow. What happened to releasing a complete and polished game? First customizable hotkeys, now this. And who knows how long of a list exists for things they plan to work out during beta, such as latency issues. Is beta going to last as long as it needs to or is that list just going to get cut short when the deadline comes?
I really just can't understand how these two statements coexist: "We won't give a release date because we're not going to release it until it's ready and we don't know when that is." "We like that feature and we want it to be in the game but it won't be there at release."
Even if you say that they can't have everything that they want at release or the game will never be released, there's such a thing called polish. The more things in at release, especially things that people definitely expect from a 2009/2010 RTS, the more polished the game is and the bigger the initial wave will be.
While this is starting to get very annoying to me with some of the features they've decided to not include at release they however at some point have to say enough is enough. The fact is when you get down to it if they included everything they wanted to in the original we would be waiting till 2012 to get a lesser form of the game, I don't consider that acceptable. I would rather a release in 09 with most of the features and then the rest of the features get patched in/added in with expansions, development is done better this way as you have the option of changing things around when you see how the public reacts to some things.
When you have as much freedom with time schedules as blizzard does it takes a great developer to know when to say the game is finished and release it as there are always things that can be improved on however if you don't do this you end up with duke nukem forever.
The thing is, how exactly is bnet 2.0 going to "amaze me" when it doesn't even have BASIC features like watching replays online (not being able to do that killed WC3 for me btw)? There's no LAN, there's no usermade tournaments (for release), infact, so far they haven't mentioned anything cool that will be in, only things I expected to be in that won't.
Yeah, they say they want to add it and hopefully they will (SC didn't even have replays at all when it launched after all, but that was in 1998!!), but I'm still disappointed, and it's still gonna hurt reviews (or at least, it should).
I'm right with you on this one. They said B.net 2.0 would be much much better and they keep saying how it will amaze us. I say fuck B.net 2.0 if it can't provide the few features that made playing SC online so enjoyable.
Seriously what is wrong with them? No LAN, OK I'm a little displeased but I could care less. No custom key support from the beginning - wtf? Are you saying writing a script like warkeys for TFT is hard to implement especially since you already did it once for another game? And now the replays? Rewind - OK cool feature props to them, but not being able to watch them online is, at least for me, preposterous. I hope they will (as they say) implement it at a later date.
The more I hear about this game, the more I'm looking forward to Single Player only. The more I hear about "features" in their games the more it looks to me like they're taking 1 step forward then 2 steps backwards.
On July 05 2009 05:44 FrozenArbiter wrote: The thing is, how exactly is bnet 2.0 going to "amaze me" when it doesn't even have BASIC features like watching replays online (not being able to do that killed WC3 for me btw)?
You don't give that impression with this.
Hell, seeing how they said their focus is on being able to communicate with others in the community even when you're playing single player, I don't see why having you and a friend watch a replay at the same time (using whispers to talk) is that far apart.
it's really taken them a long time to make such a 'polished' game. i hope they arent intentionally leaving crucial elements like custom hotkeys and multiplayer replay viewing in order to make us buy the sequels that eventually will have them.
Wow. What happened to releasing a complete and polished game? First customizable hotkeys, now this. And who knows how long of a list exists for things they plan to work out during beta, such as latency issues. Is beta going to last as long as it needs to or is that list just going to get cut short when the deadline comes?
I really just can't understand how these two statements coexist: "We won't give a release date because we're not going to release it until it's ready and we don't know when that is." "We like that feature and we want it to be in the game but it won't be there at release."
Even if you say that they can't have everything that they want at release or the game will never be released, there's such a thing called polish. The more things in at release, especially things that people definitely expect from a 2009/2010 RTS, the more polished the game is and the bigger the initial wave will be.
While this is starting to get very annoying to me with some of the features they've decided to not include at release they however at some point have to say enough is enough. The fact is when you get down to it if they included everything they wanted to in the original we would be waiting till 2012 to get a lesser form of the game, I don't consider that acceptable. I would rather a release in 09 with most of the features and then the rest of the features get patched in/added in with expansions, development is done better this way as you have the option of changing things around when you see how the public reacts to some things.
When you have as much freedom with time schedules as blizzard does it takes a great developer to know when to say the game is finished and release it as there are always things that can be improved on however if you don't do this you end up with duke nukem forever.
The thing is, how exactly is bnet 2.0 going to "amaze me" when it doesn't even have BASIC features like watching replays online (not being able to do that killed WC3 for me btw)? There's no LAN, there's no usermade tournaments (for release), infact, so far they haven't mentioned anything cool that will be in, only things I expected to be in that won't.
Yeah, they say they want to add it and hopefully they will (SC didn't even have replays at all when it launched after all, but that was in 1998!!), but I'm still disappointed, and it's still gonna hurt reviews (or at least, it should).
I agree completely although until we hear exactly what battle.net 2.0 has to offer im gonna hold my tongue. In the end I think this is all activisions doing.
blizzard ceased to be long ago. the vivendi syndicate morphed activsion and blizzard to become the covetous Activlizzard. the Activlizard sees all and has the kind of microtransaction skillz that make the likes of Facebook or even Apple gasp in awe.
Wow. What happened to releasing a complete and polished game? First customizable hotkeys, now this. And who knows how long of a list exists for things they plan to work out during beta, such as latency issues. Is beta going to last as long as it needs to or is that list just going to get cut short when the deadline comes?
I really just can't understand how these two statements coexist: "We won't give a release date because we're not going to release it until it's ready and we don't know when that is." "We like that feature and we want it to be in the game but it won't be there at release."
Even if you say that they can't have everything that they want at release or the game will never be released, there's such a thing called polish. The more things in at release, especially things that people definitely expect from a 2009/2010 RTS, the more polished the game is and the bigger the initial wave will be.
While this is starting to get very annoying to me with some of the features they've decided to not include at release they however at some point have to say enough is enough. The fact is when you get down to it if they included everything they wanted to in the original we would be waiting till 2012 to get a lesser form of the game, I don't consider that acceptable. I would rather a release in 09 with most of the features and then the rest of the features get patched in/added in with expansions, development is done better this way as you have the option of changing things around when you see how the public reacts to some things.
When you have as much freedom with time schedules as blizzard does it takes a great developer to know when to say the game is finished and release it as there are always things that can be improved on however if you don't do this you end up with duke nukem forever.
The thing is, how exactly is bnet 2.0 going to "amaze me" when it doesn't even have BASIC features like watching replays online (not being able to do that killed WC3 for me btw)? There's no LAN, there's no usermade tournaments (for release), infact, so far they haven't mentioned anything cool that will be in, only things I expected to be in that won't.
Yeah, they say they want to add it and hopefully they will (SC didn't even have replays at all when it launched after all, but that was in 1998!!), but I'm still disappointed, and it's still gonna hurt reviews (or at least, it should).
I'm right with you on this one. They said B.net 2.0 would be much much better and they keep saying how it will amaze us. I say fuck B.net 2.0 if it can't provide the few features that made playing SC online so enjoyable.
Seriously what is wrong with them? No LAN, OK I'm a little displeased but I could care less. No custom key support from the beginning - wtf? Are you saying writing a script like warkeys for TFT is hard to implement especially since you already did it once for another game? And now the replays? Rewind - OK cool feature props to them, but not being able to watch them online is, at least for me, preposterous. I hope they will (as they say) implement it at a later date.
The more I hear about this game, the more I'm looking forward to Single Player only. The more I hear about "features" in their games the more it looks to me like they're taking 1 step forward then 2 steps backwards.
The game looks amazing to me, I'm DYING to play it. But the features surrounding it? Ehhhhhhh.
I still have a feeling I'll be positively surprised once they actually announce what Bnet 2.0 will be like, as *most* things I've been negative about have turned out alright so far..
But, I'm not gonna pretend I'm not really disappointed in what they've told us so far :/
On July 05 2009 05:44 FrozenArbiter wrote: The thing is, how exactly is bnet 2.0 going to "amaze me" when it doesn't even have BASIC features like watching replays online (not being able to do that killed WC3 for me btw)?
You don't give that impression with this.
Hell, seeing how they said their focus is on being able to communicate with others in the community even when you're playing single player, I don't see why having you and a friend watch a replay at the same time (using whispers to talk) is that far apart.
Are you kidding me? It feels so distant to talk to someone outside of a game/replay from within one through whispering, there's just nothing like watching a game with a friend, pausing to point out stuff, chatting, talking about the game, etc.
On July 05 2009 05:44 FrozenArbiter wrote: The thing is, how exactly is bnet 2.0 going to "amaze me" when it doesn't even have BASIC features like watching replays online (not being able to do that killed WC3 for me btw)?
You don't give that impression with this.
Hell, seeing how they said their focus is on being able to communicate with others in the community even when you're playing single player, I don't see why having you and a friend watch a replay at the same time (using whispers to talk) is that far apart.
I don't give what? The impression that it is a basic feature?
But it is - it has been present in Starcraft since the day they released replays (I forget which patch that was - 1.07?).
Going BACKWARDS from a game made in 1998 is BAD.
Your proposed solution is completely ridiculous. Have fun syncing it, and even more fun trying to talk to 5 people at once. Oh and have fun getting those other 4 people synced up.
Seriously, why are you being such a Blizzard Apoligist in this case? There are billions of cases where they get completely undeserved criticism, but this is not one of them. This is a legitimate gripe.
If you came from a different game I can see how you wouldn't perceive this as a big deal (ie WC3 doesn't have it), but for anyone who has had it, it's huge. Imagine they said "Nah, sorry folks, we won't have AMM for SC2, you can go back to finding games the SC1 way".
On July 05 2009 05:44 FrozenArbiter wrote: The thing is, how exactly is bnet 2.0 going to "amaze me" when it doesn't even have BASIC features like watching replays online (not being able to do that killed WC3 for me btw)?
You don't give that impression with this.
Hell, seeing how they said their focus is on being able to communicate with others in the community even when you're playing single player, I don't see why having you and a friend watch a replay at the same time (using whispers to talk) is that far apart.
I don't give what? The impression that it is a basic feature?
But it is - it has been present in Starcraft since the day they released replays (I forget which patch that was - 1.07?).
Going BACKWARDS from a game made in 1998 is <font size="5">BAD</font>.
Your proposed solution is completely ridiculous. Have fun syncing it, and even more fun trying to talk to 5 people at once. Oh and have fun getting those other 4 people synced up.
Everytime I click on a new thread in the SC2 forum I get an involuntary facepalm. I should just start ignoring the game and concentrate on something good. Like Starcraft: Brood War. Yeah, if they made a sequel to Starcraft: Brood War it would be totally badass.
On July 05 2009 05:44 FrozenArbiter wrote: The thing is, how exactly is bnet 2.0 going to "amaze me" when it doesn't even have BASIC features like watching replays online (not being able to do that killed WC3 for me btw)?
You don't give that impression with this.
Hell, seeing how they said their focus is on being able to communicate with others in the community even when you're playing single player, I don't see why having you and a friend watch a replay at the same time (using whispers to talk) is that far apart.
wait what you can watch replays on bnet but only by yourself?
even if this was the case, pretty much nobody stays at one speed the entire game, they increase the speeds and lower it down depending on what's going on..
/f m ok im changing it to 4x now /f m k now go to 1x /f m 2x /f m im at 11:47 what are you guys at? /f m oh ok everyone pause at 12:00 /f m k everyone ready? /f m ok 3 /f m 2 /f m 1 /f m unpause
ya..... that's pretty much the same experience as watching it in the same game together!
On July 05 2009 05:44 FrozenArbiter wrote: The thing is, how exactly is bnet 2.0 going to "amaze me" when it doesn't even have BASIC features like watching replays online (not being able to do that killed WC3 for me btw)?
You don't give that impression with this.
Hell, seeing how they said their focus is on being able to communicate with others in the community even when you're playing single player, I don't see why having you and a friend watch a replay at the same time (using whispers to talk) is that far apart.
I don't give what? The impression that it is a basic feature?
But it is - it has been present in Starcraft since the day they released replays (I forget which patch that was - 1.07?).
Going BACKWARDS from a game made in 1998 is <font size="5">BAD</font>.
Your proposed solution is completely ridiculous. Have fun syncing it, and even more fun trying to talk to 5 people at once. Oh and have fun getting those other 4 people synced up.
Ventrilo. Problem solved.
(lol.)
oh ya Shade692003 just replace /f m with your push-to-talk key
On July 05 2009 06:28 Chuiu wrote: Everytime I click on a new thread in the SC2 forum I get an involuntary facepalm. I should just start ignoring the game and concentrate on something good. Like Starcraft: Brood War. Yeah, if they made a sequel to Starcraft: Brood War it would be totally badass.
Meh, overall I think the game is looking fantastic.
Just need to overcome the few "facepalm" worthy decisions somehow.. It's not like all they've done is bad:
- Rewinding in replays = Fantastic! - Replays are no longer bugged if from an old version = Awesome. If only I could relive the glory of days past with friends instead of on my own **HINT* *HINT*.
On July 05 2009 05:44 FrozenArbiter wrote: The thing is, how exactly is bnet 2.0 going to "amaze me" when it doesn't even have BASIC features like watching replays online (not being able to do that killed WC3 for me btw)?
You don't give that impression with this.
Hell, seeing how they said their focus is on being able to communicate with others in the community even when you're playing single player, I don't see why having you and a friend watch a replay at the same time (using whispers to talk) is that far apart.
wait what you can watch replays on bnet but only by yourself?
even if this was the case, pretty much nobody stays at one speed the entire game, they increase the speeds and lower it down depending on what's going on..
/f m ok im changing it to 4x now /f m k now go to 1x /f m 2x /f m im at 11:47 what are you guys at? /f m oh ok everyone pause at 12:00 /f m ok 3 /f m 2 /f m 1 /f m unpause
ya..... that's pretty much the same experience as watching it in the same game together!
I was just about to post something to this effect.
What if you want to rewind and watch an especially awesome part again? Uh, oh, everyone else has to pause. Or maybe they want to watch with you, so you get to sync up again. The part after that is pretty boring though, so you should fast forward and sync up again.
Yeah--no. This feature needs to be included if not at release, then soon after barring any major changes.
The biggest issue here is that I'm really getting worried about Bnet 2.0 because so far we've been getting bad news after bad news about it.
"Sorry it won't have this." "Yeah it won't have that." "No it can't do this."
For Christ's sake then, what CAN it do?! The few features they've announced are nice, but it's bothersome that some of the most asked-for features (custom tourneys, online replays) aren't even going to be in at release. They keep hyping Bnet so much that they've gone so far as to stake EVERYTHING on it, so why are they cutting so many corners on it? So much for "it'll be done when it's done." And since this is Blizzard we're talking about, we aren't going to be seeing those features for months after release.
I mean I like the things they've done like rewind, observer stats and all, but I was expecting so much more considering how "amazing" it's supposed to be.
Well, they haven't revealed ANY bnet 2.0 specific features really, I mean the replay rewind etc has nothing to do with that.
I'm so confused about why they decided to reveal what WONT be in before revealing what WILL. Maybe they wanted to make sure there was only positive thoughts once they announced it? Maybe they saw how many people were asking about LAN/Replays and decided to answer those (since these questions have been asked for a couple of years)?
I feel like maybe I'll be totally surprised by what they announce, once they get around to it, but it doesn't really change how bad I think this particular piece of news is.
What a stinking pile of horse shit. Seriously, what gives Watching replays alone blows ass compared to watching with friends.
And yeah The whole way Blizzard is approaching this is kinda aggravating It's like "HAY GUIZE the new bnet has all this SUPER AWSUM stuff, but we're not going to tell you what it is! hahaha! instead, here's all the shitty parts about it and things we aren't including for your viewing pleasure"
I guess there's probably a reason why they have no problem leaking information about things B.net 2.0 DOESN'T have and CAN'T do, while being so secretive about the supposed awesome features it will have... But still, it's just kinda annoying.
Well at least I can stop worrying about buying sc2 before it get's sold out. I am only gonna get my internet back again when I see they have added viewing replays to the bnet2.0. No point in buying the game otherwise, single player missions will be the same months later anyways.
On July 05 2009 06:51 FrozenArbiter wrote: I'm so confused about why they decided to reveal what WONT be in before revealing what WILL. Maybe they wanted to make sure there was only positive thoughts once they announced it? Maybe they saw how many people were asking about LAN/Replays and decided to answer those (since these questions have been asked for a couple of years)?
So it doesn't come back to bite them in the ass later. If we get disappointed now then there will be less complaining and disappointment later when we actually get the game and they won't have to deal with as many rabid fans of the original going "wtf blizz".
Kinda like Warhammer Online. They announced tons of cool shit they were doing with the game then a month before release they went "Sorry its not ready for release". People complained, they knew EA was doing it so they would have an edge on WoW's expansion, but once the game was out everyone forgot about it because they were just glad to be playing.
On July 05 2009 06:51 FrozenArbiter wrote: I'm so confused about why they decided to reveal what WONT be in before revealing what WILL. Maybe they wanted to make sure there was only positive thoughts once they announced it? Maybe they saw how many people were asking about LAN/Replays and decided to answer those (since these questions have been asked for a couple of years)?
So it doesn't come back to bite them in the ass later. If we get disappointed now then there will be less complaining and disappointment later when we actually get the game and they won't have to deal with as many rabid fans of the original going "wtf blizz".
Kinda like Warhammer Online. They announced tons of cool shit they were doing with the game then a month before release they went "Sorry its not ready for release". People complained, they knew EA was doing it so they would have an edge on WoW's expansion, but once the game was out everyone forgot about it because they were just glad to be playing.
I'm actually starting to think that too. Get all the bad news out of the way, then announce the good. It's definitely better than the other way around.
It still doesn't diminish my disappointment though, because online replays was something I was really hoping for.
On July 05 2009 05:44 FrozenArbiter wrote: The thing is, how exactly is bnet 2.0 going to "amaze me" when it doesn't even have BASIC features like watching replays online (not being able to do that killed WC3 for me btw)? There's no LAN, there's no usermade tournaments (for release), infact, so far they haven't mentioned anything cool that will be in, only things I expected to be in that won't.
This says it so well. Don't you have good connections with Blizz guys so you can bring this up to someone personally?
they don't think they have enough "new" features to release with the expansions so they're holding back on some of the stuff so they have more to hype with a year later
they're concerned it's just a step away from replacing watching games on gaming channels - where the serious money will hopefully be - maybe that's also the reason they didn't include it in war3
What are they doing about watching replays when you don't have the map? Will we still have to search it online? That was also a major pain in war3 that made little sense.
I really don't think this is worth getting that worked up about. At all.
"Not in at release" just means that its something that's not really that high of a priority, a "cool," optional feature which people won't really miss, and so they're working not working on it right now in lieu of more important things. And really, considering this particular feature wasn't in Warcraft 3, and no one seemed to care that much, why would they consider it a major priority? However, if the community really does think otherwise, and the opinion to that effect is strong, then they could easily change their minds and decide to add it in before release anyway. They've done stuff like that before. It's not like its something like the LAN thing, where they made a very specific decision regarding a core feature for very specific reasons. The decision's not set in stone. This is just "Hey, that'd be cool, but it's not a big deal. Let's concentrate on something else, and we'll patch it in later." But, again, if you guys really think this is a big deal, instead of posting tirades about how "BLIZZARD SUCKS!!" or describing exactly when and how Blizzard went wrong and became the evil, soul-sucking, WoW-making corporation they are today, simply make it known that this feature is important to you, in a reasonable fashion. Blizzard reads the forums; they'll see it--but they're not going to be very persuaded by personal insults.
And, if worst comes to worst, then you'll probably have to wait a few months before watching replays online. So its not the worst thing in the world.
i dont mind them adding additional features later on. im more interested in how singleplayer will turn out, not some feature that i might use every other week
They want to make this game an esports game and they have a team dedicated to making it that way. But yet they won't have these at release(or at all):
Custom keys - A feature that kind of promotes high level play by being comfortable navigating the keyboard.
LAN - I understand games being played over Battle.net and having LAN latency if you are on the same network. But what about these tournaments that rent out event halls to hold games? There is not always going to be a guaranteed accessible internet connection at event halls all over the world. LAN also promotes playing with friends, getting others involved in a new games, sharing tips with others, etc. which fuels esports.
Replays with others - Once again sharing tips and such while watching with others fuels better play and esports.
On July 05 2009 08:04 Captain Peabody wrote: I really don't think this is worth getting that worked up about. At all.
"Not in at release" just means that its something that's not really that high of a priority, a "cool," optional feature which people won't really miss, and so they're working not working on it right now in lieu of more important things. And really, considering this particular feature wasn't in Warcraft 3, and no one seemed to care that much, why would they consider it a major priority? However, if the community really does think otherwise, and the opinion to that effect is strong, then they could easily change their minds and decide to add it in before release anyway. They've done stuff like that before. It's not like its something like the LAN thing, where they made a very specific decision regarding a core feature for very specific reasons. The decision's not set in stone. This is just "Hey, that'd be cool, but it's not a big deal. Let's concentrate on something else, and we'll patch it in later." But, again, if you guys really think this is a big deal, instead of posting tirades about how "BLIZZARD SUCKS!!" or describing exactly when and how Blizzard went wrong and became the evil, soul-sucking, WoW-making corporation they are today, simply make it known that this feature is important to you, in a reasonable fashion. Blizzard reads the forums; they'll see it--but they're not going to be very persuaded by personal insults.
And, if worst comes to worst, then you'll probably have to wait a few months before watching replays online. So its not the worst thing in the world.
Replay rewinding - THAT is a "cool, optional" feature. Seriously, everyone has been assuming since day 1 that we'll be able to watch replays online.
Infact, despite having asked them to confirm this since day 1, I've always mostly assumed they'd not make the same mistake twice.
I agree that "Blizzard sucks"-posts are pointless, but this is not a minor thing. In fact, it's a major reason I never got into WC3, and I think a suprising amount of SC players aren't even AWARE that WC3 doesn't have this feature (I'm constantly surprised by the "WTF WC3 doesn't have replays online!?" response I get when I mention it).
Even entertainment value aside, it also has a seriously negative impact on learning the game. Gone are the days of watching the replay after you lost.. WITH the guy who beat you. It's helpful man -_-
This is a simple matter of how soon they want the game to come out. They don't have enough time to get everything in the game by 31/12/2009, so some things will have to wait. Keep in mind that they've said they want a 4-6 month beta and they also want the game out in 2009--they're running seriously low on time to actually pull that off.
Try to relax, guys It's not the end of the world.
Also, a mod should edit the title of the post to say "no online replays at launch" because I think a lot of people are just inferring that there won't be any ever and flipping their shit for no reason.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned why Blizzard didn't allow online replays in War3 and why they won't be doing it in SC2, so I'll offer my explanation (not 100% sure but I'm fairly certain this is the reason).
In the original starcraft, map files are very small. The map data was stored in each replay along with each players actions. That way, you could host the replay, every one would download the file (map + player actions), and you could all watch together.
In War3, map file sizes increased dramatically, especially for some UMS maps (DotA is about 3mb, some other maps are far bigger again). In order to watch this replay online, you'd need to save the map data + player actions in the replay, so that players who don't actually own that particular map can download it in the replay file and be able to watch. The problem with this system is that every single DotA replay would be 3mb+ in size, and players would constantly be re-downloading huge chunks of repeated map information just to access the unique player action data . To remedy this problem, blizzard changed the way replays are saved in War3: You don't save the map data in the replay file, you ONLY save the player action data. That way, to watch any given replay, you require the map file stored on your hard-drive separately to the player-action data in the replay file.
This would make sense back in the days of War3; broadband connections still weren't mainstream, so huge downloads just to watch a replay were obviously (and rightfully so) considered ridiculous in Blizzards eyes. That's why they separated map data from replay data.
In SC2, I'm not sure exactly how it would work. Blizzard could revert to the old SC:BW ways of storing player action + map all in the one file, but again this would be burning through bandwidth and hard drive space unnecessarily. It's nowhere near the same degree of a problem today as it was in War3's time, because we have many more broadband connections and hard drive capacity has dramatically increased. But it still makes some kind of logical sense as to why Blizzard are continuing to take this approach with SC2 maps. And who knows? If the average SC2 UMS is 20mb+, then I'd be glad to not have to save the map data in every replay -.-. Imagine 100 replays on a 20mb UMS map? That would be 2gig worth of data stored on your drive -.- and only about 500kb from each replay would actually represent the player actions, most of it would be redundant map data. However, doing it the war3 way would only take up about 30megabytes.
I'm fairly sure Blizzard could solve this problem to make a 'best of both worlds' approach, but the solution that I've imagined is very convoluted and would be difficult for Blizzard to implement. Just be aware that Blizzard isn't doing this for laziness sake, there is a very legitimate reason behind it.
dude, there is no way UMS maps will be more than a few MBs. and the problem you went on about for six paragraphs can be fixed very easily: Download map and player action data separately (i.e. as two separate files). SC2 checks for the existence of the necessary map file (just as it would if you enter a game with a map which you don't have in SC1), and doesn't download the map if it finds it. Done.
LilClinkin, War3 mapsizes and replay sizes are *almost identical to SC*.
I don't give a fuck if I can't watch a replay of an UMS, I can't in SC1 anyway. I also couldn't care less if the replay was 5 mb instead of 100 kb - it's 2009!!
Oh and apparently multiple MB ums maps are no problems, so why are replays?
It really still does nothing to explain why you can't watch replays in WC3. Why not just download the map from the person you are dling the replay from? He obviously has it.
1) Distribute actions only, and require players to have a map in order to view the replay (kick those who have not when replay is started)
2) Distribute actions, but if someone doesn't have the map send it to him from those players who have it.
This is absolutely no problem to implement.
This is so weak by Blizzard I have written a huge 3 page post to justify their decision to take out LAN, but I don't even want to post it. Online replays is such an important function, and I agree very much with FrozenArbiter in that it was one of the main turnoffs of Warcraft 3.
Damn blizzard, Battle.net 2.0 is going to very bad if this continues to happen, no having LAN is ok sad, and now no replays with friends?? COME ON WTF!!!!!!!!
all the ladder, the whispering, the clan functions or whatever doesnt means anything compared to be able to watch replays with my friends at the same time!!!!!
blizzard i hope u do the right thing and put it in release and not leaving it as a w3 crap.
The only reason I can think of for not shipping with multiplayer replay is some complication with the new 'rewind' and time skip features, or those drawing on the screen and ghost building features they have planned for commentators and coaches. Maybe they want that feature working for it too. But honestly this is fucking stupid. Even if it was more limited than BW and updated later i'd be happy.
On July 05 2009 10:46 DeCoup wrote: The only reason I can think of for not shipping with multiplayer replay is some complication with the new 'rewind' and time skip features, or those drawing on the screen and ghost building features they have planned for commentators and coaches. Maybe they want that feature working for it too. But honestly this is fucking stupid. Even if it was more limited than BW and updated later i'd be happy.
Yes, seriously - they don't need to implement rewind for multiple players if they can't do that for release. I'm pretty sure that'd give them better reviews than not having it at all lol.
On July 05 2009 10:46 DeCoup wrote: The only reason I can think of for not shipping with multiplayer replay is some complication with the new 'rewind' and time skip features, or those drawing on the screen and ghost building features they have planned for commentators and coaches. Maybe they want that feature working for it too. But honestly this is fucking stupid. Even if it was more limited than BW and updated later i'd be happy.
Yes, seriously - they don't need to implement rewind for multiple players if they can't do that for release. I'm pretty sure that'd give them better reviews than not having it at all lol.
Blizzard live for reviews and pr. Don't worry the online replays will be at the release or else blizzard will have to live through the worst shit storm ever made about a game.
On July 05 2009 10:46 DeCoup wrote: The only reason I can think of for not shipping with multiplayer replay is some complication with the new 'rewind' and time skip features, or those drawing on the screen and ghost building features they have planned for commentators and coaches. Maybe they want that feature working for it too. But honestly this is fucking stupid. Even if it was more limited than BW and updated later i'd be happy.
Yes, seriously - they don't need to implement rewind for multiple players if they can't do that for release. I'm pretty sure that'd give them better reviews than not having it at all lol.
Blizzard live for reviews and pr. Don't worry the online replays will be at the release or else blizzard will have to live through the worst shit storm ever made about a game.
That's going a little too far. SC2 isn't going to get bad reviews over no online replays. It certainly didn't stop WC3 from getting rave reviews after all.
On July 05 2009 10:46 DeCoup wrote: The only reason I can think of for not shipping with multiplayer replay is some complication with the new 'rewind' and time skip features, or those drawing on the screen and ghost building features they have planned for commentators and coaches. Maybe they want that feature working for it too. But honestly this is fucking stupid. Even if it was more limited than BW and updated later i'd be happy.
Yes, seriously - they don't need to implement rewind for multiple players if they can't do that for release. I'm pretty sure that'd give them better reviews than not having it at all lol.
Blizzard live for reviews and pr. Don't worry the online replays will be at the release or else blizzard will have to live through the worst shit storm ever made about a game.
You are delusional, some smalls forums nerd-raging is nothing resembling a ''shit storm'' and I doubt it will affect reviews or sales. At all.
I have been, admittedly, blindly optimistic about SC2. Never letting any of the shit get me down, like Lan and shit.
But not being able to watch replays with friends online is simply fucking retarded. I'm sorry. How can you expect to surpass brood war when you downgrade such an important aspect of competitive play.
W T F?
The technology exists already. Why can't it be implemented? Make rewind SP only for all I care.
This is no small issue. Can they really not fit this feature into the release, especially considering a release isn't even set?
For some reason this is making me very angry and now I must leave.
Well, at least they were being honest in saying they dont want events without internet to be able to hold tournaments.
They also were honest about not wanting third party programs allowing people an alternative place to play the game online.
What really upsets me is he calls iccup 'pirating' when in reality it is things like iccup that have kept Starcraft popular this late in its life. It is because of LAN, iccup, and other things like that that made it as famous it is today. They are completely disregarding it and essentially saying 'thanks for all the hard work on this game we stopped supporting years ago, but what you did was wrong and we are stopping it now'.
The ICCUP question was stupid. "Are you gonna let people pirate your game?"
What the hell else CAN he say? No matter if he has a personal opinion of ICCUP as being fine (no idea if he does), there's really no other answer he could give. I mean they turn a blind eye to them since they don't make money off it (if anyone recalls, gamei lasted about 3 months once they started charging), which is really all that you can ask.
On July 05 2009 10:46 DeCoup wrote: The only reason I can think of for not shipping with multiplayer replay is some complication with the new 'rewind' and time skip features, or those drawing on the screen and ghost building features they have planned for commentators and coaches. Maybe they want that feature working for it too. But honestly this is fucking stupid. Even if it was more limited than BW and updated later i'd be happy.
Yes, seriously - they don't need to implement rewind for multiple players if they can't do that for release. I'm pretty sure that'd give them better reviews than not having it at all lol.
Blizzard live for reviews and pr. Don't worry the online replays will be at the release or else blizzard will have to live through the worst shit storm ever made about a game.
You are delusional, some smalls forums nerd-raging is nothing resembling a ''shit storm'' and I doubt it will affect reviews or sales. At all.
He's talking about the press obviously.. I don't think they are gonna get as much shit about this as they should, which is unfortunate (or fortunate, depending on how you look at it).
Even though it was explicitly and unambiguously said, and even clarified right after, I'm still hoping he misspoke. Could've swore they said before you could. This is a feature worth delaying over.
WC3 maps are only slightly bigger than SC maps unless they have extensive triggers, I'm pretty sure. The smallest map in the Frozen Throne folder is 65 KB (a 4 player map). The smallest map in the BroodWar folder is 65 kb (a 2 player map).
WC3 maps are only slightly bigger than SC maps unless they have extensive triggers, I'm pretty sure. The smallest map in the Frozen Throne folder is 65 KB (a 4 player map). The smallest map in the BroodWar folder is 65 kb (a 2 player map).
I stand corrected, only looked at the NGL maps. But those are still a full MB bigger and don't do anything more special than the Blizzard ones than advertise their names.
WC3 maps are only slightly bigger than SC maps unless they have extensive triggers, I'm pretty sure. The smallest map in the Frozen Throne folder is 65 KB (a 4 player map). The smallest map in the BroodWar folder is 65 kb (a 2 player map).
I stand corrected, only looked at the NGL maps. But those are still a full MB bigger and don't do anything more special than the Blizzard ones than advertise their names.
Well that makes sense, since they implement graphics that aren't found in the regular game. A "tree" or whatever in the .mpq folder might be close to a MB, so it's safe to assume outside images coming in could increase the size by a MB or so.
This news is pretty disappointing. Like FA, I never watched very many War3 replays because they're not really fun to watch alone and offline. I think I've watched maybe a dozen ever, but I've watched hundreds, if not thousands, of BW replays on Battle.net. Let's hope the first patch is out soon after release, and that it contains multiplayer replays.
I never wrote my post in support of Blizzards decisions. I merely explained why they did what they did. I want to be able to watch replays online just as much as you guys do. Don't attack me for posting useful information, it makes you look like whiny fuckheads.
Frozenarbiter: Yes I am aware that some War3 melee maps are small, similar in size to BW maps. However, the UMS are much larger, and this must have been why Blizzard decided to do what they did. This was Blizzard's decision, not mine. I agree with you: it's stupid. The methods suggested by other posters are a better way of enabling online replays. Tell it to Blizzard, not me.
On July 05 2009 10:47 sgt_cr wrote: LilClinkin you are wrong, to be able to watch replays in w3 u still need to have the map, if u dont have the map u cant watch the replay.
Blizzard is being just stupid, this is ONE MAJOR ISSUE.
Wow, fail harder. Yes you do need the map, I never said you didn't. Stop putting words into my mouth and learn to read what I wrote, rather than jump to stupid assumptions.
Im with FA on this one, usually people complain about nothing. But this is pretty stupid, whats next? "Hey guys you wont be able to actually play each other at launch, its a feature we'd like to add in the future"
Ok that was stupid but you get the picture... we're supposed to have improved experience, this actually diminishes it, hope they wont pull a wc3.
I never wrote my post in support of Blizzards decisions. I merely explained why they did what they did. I want to be able to watch replays online just as much as you guys do. Don't attack me for posting useful information, it makes you look like whiny fuckheads.
Frozenarbiter: Yes I am aware that some War3 melee maps are small, similar in size to BW maps. However, the UMS are much larger, and this must have been why Blizzard decided to do what they did. This was Blizzard's decision, not mine. I agree with you: it's stupid. The methods suggested by other posters are a better way of enabling online replays. Tell it to Blizzard, not me.
On July 05 2009 10:47 sgt_cr wrote: LilClinkin you are wrong, to be able to watch replays in w3 u still need to have the map, if u dont have the map u cant watch the replay.
Blizzard is being just stupid, this is ONE MAJOR ISSUE.
Wow, fail harder. Yes you do need the map, I never said you didn't. Stop putting words into my mouth and learn to read what I wrote, rather than jump to stupid assumptions.
I don't see why you say this is why they made that decision. There is no difference between this and downloading the actual ums map for when you want to actually play it.
Infact, you don't even need to support replays for UMS if you don't want to (they are unwatchable when sped up in BW anyway):
Again, where are you getting this from? Where did Blizzard say this? What am I missing?
You say "this must be why" <- Why? It makes so little sense that I refuse to believe Blizzard would behave that irrationally :S There must be a better line of reasoning.
They obviously have some reason for not including it...they haven't included it since WC3. They know everyone wants it, but they don't do it - I just wish I understood WHY. I'm sure I would see their side of things if they would explain it.
The only reason why they are omitting online replays for launch is most likely time constrain, and not anything else. It just isn't a big deal for a majority of their customers.
On July 05 2009 15:21 DanceDance wrote: I have one question.
Where do we go to download replays if we cant get them from the new battle.net? I do not want to go to some third party site to get a replay.
What is the big problem, and trying to put all replays on one server would likely cause some mess. Just alt tab, find and download replay it takes less then a minute.
I hope they just include the missing features in beta or soon after release. It's sad that they're omitting some of them, but I'd prefer the game to be released on schedule rather than have them delay it just so that they can include couple extra toys.
On July 05 2009 17:11 maybenexttime wrote: I hope they just include the missing features in beta or soon after release. It's sad that they're omitting some of them, but I'd prefer the game to be released on schedule rather than have them delay it just so that they can include couple extra toys.
Yeah that is great but the game has very dubious mechanics now, and if they want to rush beta in 4 months then we can end up with the game that patch will not fix. Also there is no guarantee that they will add those feature after the game gets gold status.
I cant believe people are passing this off as an "extra" or a "toy". Watching replays together was a fundamental part of the SC experience for so many people. For me it is a make or break deal.
The other super important thing about this feature for Blizzard is that it's a great way to bring casuals into the game. People who might be intimidated by a match can still enjoy hopping into a replay and spectating a saved, well played game by good players with other people.
This is one thing that also really hurt the WC3 experience - how do I watch a replay together with a friend? We'd have to get on vent and sync up.
On July 05 2009 17:35 Manifesto7 wrote: I cant believe people are passing this off as an "extra" or a "toy". Watching replays together was a fundamental part of the SC experience for so many people. For me it is a make or break deal.
I think you can pass it off as a "toy" if you consider the fact that they would be able to release the game in December 2009 while adding this feature in January or February next year instead of delaying the whole game those couple months just so that they can have it on release.
On July 05 2009 06:05 Yenzilla wrote: Watch the video before you start begin fear-mongering, they said they don't have replay watching with more than one person at the same time. Also, the other feature that won't make its way into the original game is a replay editor, not replays.
Tip of the Day!: Translations of an interview that was translated to another language do not lend themselves to accuracy.
interesting concept...
what is a replay editor?
and is it similar to the play-from-replay feature?
Honestly I am very upset about this decision. Me and my best mate were planning on playing as competitively as we can against each other, and every time we had a match where one of us was saying 'ok htf did you just beat me' we were planning on opening up the replay and pointing our mistakes, tactics or micro out to each other. This will severely decrease the efficency of our learning process as a whole. We'll make do.. but still, epic fail.
Unfortunately this sort of attitude was to be expected the moment they announced a three-part game... Though seriously... what's the big deal about getting multiplayer replays?
On July 05 2009 20:33 Hammy wrote: Unfortunately this sort of attitude was to be expected the moment they announced a three-part game... Though seriously... what's the big deal about getting multiplayer replays?
This has nothing to do with a three part game.
Multiplayer replays represents an enormous social aspect of broodwar. Watching replays of tournaments with friends is awesome, and watching replays with the people you play against is one of the best ways to improve.
I've watched as many replays as I have played games in the last 9 years.
On July 05 2009 20:40 Cheerio wrote: Would you not play SC1 when it was released just because there were no replays at version 1.00? Come on. Release the game already, it is goon enough.
On July 05 2009 20:40 Cheerio wrote: Would you not play SC1 when it was released just because there were no replays at version 1.00? Come on. Release the game already, it is goon enough.
When SC was released there was no rts with replay option it was a new concept. Most players were SP then, and discover mp with SC, much more popular then War2, or any other mp.
On July 05 2009 20:40 Cheerio wrote: Would you not play SC1 when it was released just because there were no replays at version 1.00? Come on. Release the game already, it is goon enough.
Im convinced that BW would be long dead with no replays to be honest. And not being able to watch and comment with friends is pretty bad considering that most of the time thats the way to share interesting non pro replays, im not gonna download the BO3 between X e Y but if X comes and tell me on bnet: "hey i just won against Y wanna watch?" i almost sure going to watch with him.
From an international esports perspective, this makes little sense. If we really can get into a situation with very minimal lantency then live stream generally sucks ass. Things like the TSL couldn't be broadcast live due to potential latency issues. Replays were an easy way to work around this and allowed the games to be played lag free while also ensuring a lag free cast. Sure there was the delay, but after the initial "omg its a replay" no one cared that it was a rep.
That, in addition to everything else said really pisses me off =[
On July 05 2009 16:52 FrozenArbiter wrote: But rewinding replays is?
From what I have seen, yes, rewinding in replays have been requested more than watching replays online.
Rewinding in replays is a new feature that would be useful to help analyze games. Watching replays online is an old feature, assumed to be carried through, which is ESSENTIAL in analyzing games (and just generally enjoying the beauty of SC)
Can anyone please confirm they are at least fixing for SC2 the map issue war3 has with replays? I was assuming they are, but now that they're doing this, I can't be sure about anything anymore.
On July 05 2009 06:05 Yenzilla wrote: Watch the video before you start begin fear-mongering, they said they don't have replay watching with more than one person at the same time. Also, the other feature that won't make its way into the original game is a replay editor, not replays.
Tip of the Day!: Translations of an interview that was translated to another language do not lend themselves to accuracy.
You did not understand any of posts here. We want to watch replays online with friends! That's one of the best things to do lol. It's just as if Blizz said "hey Tasteless, Artosis, Day[9] - in SC2 you CAN'T commentate pro games, we don't want to have commentators in SC2". Plain sucky. Man, i agree with most ppl - screw LAN but hell, reps with friends, is this REALLY so hard to implement? :/ I sometimes gather with my SC-playing friends on bn and we just watch reps and analyse them, it's just fun and SC2 won't have that option, it sux sux sux :/
This news just screwed my day
Come on, SC replay system was IMO better than WC3 one and now SC2 system is gonna be even worse than either SC or WC3's one :|
On July 05 2009 16:52 FrozenArbiter wrote: But rewinding replays is?
From what I have seen, yes, rewinding in replays have been requested more than watching replays online.
Rewinding in replays is a new feature that would be useful to help analyze games. Watching replays online is an old feature, assumed to be carried through, which is ESSENTIAL in analyzing games (and just generally enjoying the beauty of SC)
That wasn't really the point though.
The SC 2 team got two lists: the first one is a to-do-list, all things on that list needs to be in the game at launch. The second list is a wish list, things on that list are what the SC 2 team wants to add beyond the launch, whether it is in patches or expansions.
Now, the SC 2 team saw that the rewind feature was heavily requested so they put that feature on the to-do-list, while the online replay feature wasn't requested for as much so it went to the wish list.
I'm sure that if people start to request that feature in a polite and constructive manner; that they will add that into the game in one of the earlier patches.
It's not just no multiplayer replays, it's no multiplayer replays while the game is brand new and they are vital to people learning the game with each other. Adding it later is fine and all, but that won't make up for it not being there when people want to use it most - when they don't grasp the game and want to exchange knowledge with each other over the games they have played. This is a very disappointing move
On July 05 2009 23:05 Eury wrote: I'm sure that if people start to request that feature in a polite and constructive manner; that they will add that into the game in one of the earlier patches.
On July 05 2009 23:05 Eury wrote: I'm sure that if people start to request that feature in a polite and constructive manner; that they will add that into the game in one of the earlier patches.
I personally don't see why this is so big a deal, I for one have never used this in SC either.When I watch reps, I usually watch 70 % of the game in the 4x-16x speed so I guess nobody would like to watch the games with me anyways.
On July 05 2009 16:52 FrozenArbiter wrote: But rewinding replays is?
From what I have seen, yes, rewinding in replays have been requested more than watching replays online.
Rewinding in replays is a new feature that would be useful to help analyze games. Watching replays online is an old feature, assumed to be carried through, which is ESSENTIAL in analyzing games (and just generally enjoying the beauty of SC)
That wasn't really the point though.
The SC 2 team got two lists: the first one is a to-do-list, all things on that list needs to be in the game at launch. The second list is a wish list, things on that list are what the SC 2 team wants to add beyond the launch, whether it is in patches or expansions.
Now, the SC 2 team saw that the rewind feature was heavily requested so they put that feature on the to-do-list, while the online replay feature wasn't requested for as much so it went to the wish list.
I'm sure that if people start to request that feature in a polite and constructive manner; that they will add that into the game in one of the earlier patches.
It wasn't requested because nobody imagined that it wouldn't be there in the first place. -_-
On July 05 2009 23:34 Psyqo wrote: Ya, this is getting ridiculous.
Why? Why is it ridiculous to expect a sequel to a 10 year old game to ship with online replays, when said feature has been in the game since.. 2001? (I forget which patch added it)
There are many SC2 topics that ARE ridiculous, but this is not one of them. WC3 has gone 7 years without online replays. SEVEN YEARS - no 3rd party apps, no blizzard patch no nothing.
Blizzard just fails everytime we turn around. First no LAN (hope that we can still authenticate through bnet and then set up a true LAN), then no hotkeys (WTF??? EVERY game has hotkey now), and now no online replays (Hey Blizzard, 1998 is calling...)
Reading the battle net forums it seems like the average casual player doesn't really care about the removal of viewing replays with friends. So it looks like Blizz is catering to them. Which saddens me because Blizz kept saying they wanted to make SC2 a huge esport game. So why are they removing a feature that is a huge benefit to one's training and improvement?
Not being able to watch replays online doesn't seem a very big loss to me. I've never watched replays online with anyone, I find it easier to watch them myself.
Watching replays alone is like watching live SC games alone (ie no mirc, no live thread hype, nobody else there with you). Even if you didn't use it in SC (I think you missed out to tell you the truth), you should still be able to see that it's a pretty huge feature that really should be in the game if it was in SC1.
On July 05 2009 23:42 ggfobster wrote: Blizzard just fails everytime we turn around. First no LAN (hope that we can still authenticate through bnet and then set up a true LAN), then no hotkeys (WTF??? EVERY game has hotkey now), and now no online replays (Hey Blizzard, 1998 is calling...)
I think you misunderstood. No custom hotkey doesnt no hotkey. Of course the game will have its default hotkeys. and btw, cant watch replay online with friends is really pain. I think they reserve this feature for their already comfirmed upcoming expansions of the game... Damn Blizzard, dont become EA, just dont T_T
This is not something you can use microtransactions for, let's be serious. First of all, they have indicated that things that were available in SC or WC3 will NOT be charged for.
Second, you think they'd charge on a per replay basis? Of course not! So premium accounts? Well, they haven't even hinted at having premium accounts.
I don't think they are going to have this as a pay-to-use service, I think they genuinely didn't realize how important this is. More likely than trying to charge money for it, because it's just not something that lends itself to it very well, considering its history.
I can see there being a special service for something like this, akin to a replay portal that you pay 50 cents to log into, or a service that you pay 2$ a month for access to. It certainly isn't impossible.
Either way, what other explanation do you have for one of the defining features of the game being chopped out? We had a pretty conclusive conclusion that LAN is being removed because blizzard wants to cash in, so what's the excuse here? Add it in the protoss or zerg game and force people to buy that? Why not deliver a full product at launch, especially given the massive development cycle the game's gone through?
If you watch the interview, he just sort of casually says "that isn't in yet, hopefully in the future" like it isn't a big deal, not like it's some huge feature that is worthy of holding out on to charge extra for. They don't understand how important it is because they just don't really get the scene.
On July 06 2009 00:47 floor exercise wrote: If you watch the interview, he just sort of casually says "that isn't in yet, hopefully in the future" like it isn't a big deal, not like it's some huge feature that is worthy of holding out on to charge extra for. They don't understand how important it is because they just don't really get the scene.
This is exactly why I fear for the esports scene with blizz in control. They see it happening and want to cash in on it but they clearly don't follow it or know how it works. I'm rather nervous for sc2 after seeing what they pass off as professional WoW.
I'm starting to see a trend of: Blizz: "Look how shiny this is!" Players: "Cool, is [x] basic feature in yet?" Blizz: "No we're not actually going to implement that, but look how shiny this is!" Players: "You're not going to add something that was standard in 1999? That blows what are you thinking?" Blizz: "Its not important, look how shiny this is!"
On July 06 2009 00:46 L wrote: I can see there being a special service for something like this, akin to a replay portal that you pay 50 cents to log into, or a service that you pay 2$ a month for access to. It certainly isn't impossible.
Either way, what other explanation do you have for one of the defining features of the game being chopped out? We had a pretty conclusive conclusion that LAN is being removed because blizzard wants to cash in, so what's the excuse here? Add it in the protoss or zerg game and force people to buy that? Why not deliver a full product at launch, especially given the massive development cycle the game's gone through?
They didn't have it in WC3, yet they had no transactions for that game. Who knows?
I honestly think they aren't aware of how important it is.
The precedent for the last RTS that had a substantial pay component was the games for windows live debacle that Universe at War had. After that incident, I'm not exactly inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to missing features.
On July 06 2009 00:46 L wrote: I can see there being a special service for something like this, akin to a replay portal that you pay 50 cents to log into, or a service that you pay 2$ a month for access to. It certainly isn't impossible.
Either way, what other explanation do you have for one of the defining features of the game being chopped out? We had a pretty conclusive conclusion that LAN is being removed because blizzard wants to cash in, so what's the excuse here? Add it in the protoss or zerg game and force people to buy that? Why not deliver a full product at launch, especially given the massive development cycle the game's gone through?
They didn't have it in WC3, yet they had no transactions for that game. Who knows?
I honestly think they aren't aware of how important it is.
I think it comes down to exactly this. Barely a word has been spoken about online replays (just some passing comments really).
Again some "good" news for sc2. It will take like 1 year just to make this game complete and another 5 to balance the races so I'll buy it then. OMG! t.t not good, not good at all
They have time to add something as unimportant as rewards, but doesn't bother with something that is actually useful, like watching replays online? -___-;;
Don't jump the gun and assume that they're just gonna charge for it. Leave that conclusion-jumping garbage to the WoW forums, not here.
I personally agree with FA that Blizzard seems unaware of how much we want this feature. It's somewhat troubling that some of the most wanted features are being put on the backburner for other things. It really makes me wonder just what is going on with Blizzard's priorities here.
On July 05 2009 16:52 FrozenArbiter wrote: But rewinding replays is?
From what I have seen, yes, rewinding in replays have been requested more than watching replays online.
Yup, rewinding replays is definitely requested more than watching replays online. This is because we all just assumed it was a guaranteed feature because it was in SC1.
It seems too simple... Some magical stuff must be happening with the rewinding in order to make this a difficult process.. that could be so entwined with the replay format that they can't simply disable rewinding and boom it works.
Still, this is a disappointment. Surely Blizzard understands that announcing all of these cuts is just going to anger people. Where are my rose colored glasses, Blizzard? You forgot to send me a pair.
I am still optimistic overall... but my confidence will be waning if this keeps up..
I don't have any friends that are into Starcraft so I always watch both live streams and replays alone.
The closest I've gotten to watching a replay with friends was when I watched Tasteless commentate the GOM invitational, his enthusiastic outbursts were awesome, they kinda affirmed my own thoughts about what was going on most of the time (except for the times when he turned out to know better), and he made my watching that much more involved and fun. If watching a replay with friends is anything like that then it's a feature that cannot be excluded.
They said in the interview they definitely won't have broadband internet be a requirement, but I think it might be nice if it was. How many people would be left out internationally due to only having 56k dial-up?
On July 06 2009 05:31 Jonoman92 wrote: They said in the interview they definitely won't have broadband internet be a requirement, but I think it might be nice if it was. How many people would be left out internationally due to only having 56k dial-up?
That is silly if somebody has slow internet and don't want to wait that long or get kicked then that is not a reason to remove that option for everybody else. He loose nothing becouse of that option, that is like putting only extra high latency becouse they don't to require only IP with good pings to they servers.
Anyway technically it would work even with 56k modem it would just take time, so it would meet minimum requirements, and when somebody watch replay with friends then chatting for 5 minutes while it is downloading may be an option for them.
I doubt blizzard would gouge people playing Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 for money left and right (at least not for large amounts) for features which many would consider a standard, like viewing replays over battle.net.
Note: As long as they get it out there with in 6 months or so of the initial release it's fine, to me. But why would he say something like that when the game lacks a release date? What's stopping you from pushing back the release date a month or so to develop some additional features to be ready at launch.
Saying that features that they mean to put on there but wont have by release just eggs people on for bad reviews of the game. As most review games at release not a few months down the line.
Anybody who jumps to the conclusion that it will be a payed feature is fucking retarded. Blizzard has NEVER charged for a feature that wasn't cosmetic and or worthless (like switching character name and appearance/pets from WoW TCG/ switching realms).
lol suggesting they will charge you to watch replays with friends is stupid. Obviously it is on a list of things that they want to do - it's just not as high on that list as maybe it should be. By the time anyone wants to (or should...) run a starleague/tourny etc i imagine it will be patched in.
People are just scared of the newer battle.net to have a ton of must have features that everyone would love to have but would cost them money.
Really I just think the RP department for blizzard is doing a horrible job at keeping the communities happy, as them seem to word their statements and interviews in the worst way possible, or at least the communities look for the worst way to take it.
Manifesto said it best "It wasn't requested because nobody imagined that it wouldn't be there in the first place. -_-"
and I bet when they find out how important it is to everyone that replays be shareable, then I can't imagine there being much if any difficulty in making that happen. If they want this game to be so successful, and they seem to be putting a lot of eggs in this basket (ex. GOM) then I woul surely be surprised if they did not try their best to make the game complete and everyone reasonably happy.
On July 06 2009 07:18 lololol wrote: I really doubt they'll charge for it, but it's very likely that they'll add it as an incentive to buy the first expansion, instead of just a patch.
I seriously doubt that when it comes to watching replays online with friends. If you care enough for that feature you are most likely hardcore enough to buy the expansion no matter what anyhow. It just doesn't make a good bullet point on the back of a box.
I imagine that no online replays on WC3 was less of an issue because WC3 games are pretty long and boring, same goes for dota (fucking 1 hour reps with nothing happening omg) while SC has 15-20 min., 30 min. max reps that are full of action
On July 06 2009 09:08 writer22816 wrote: I imagine that no online replays on WC3 was less of an issue because WC3 games are pretty long and boring, same goes for dota (fucking 1 hour reps with nothing happening omg) while SC has 15-20 min., 30 min. max reps that are full of action
Huh... this has nothing to do with anything? How the game is played has no effect on the possibility of online replays. I can watch my hours long replays just fine in SC.
To both Trezeguet23 and Psychobabas- Not being able to watch replays together over bnet is not the same as not being able to share replays over bnet. Just pointing that out.
They didn't say you can't share replays or that replays are not available for download via b.net some how. They just said that you can't view them together yet.
On July 06 2009 09:08 writer22816 wrote: I imagine that no online replays on WC3 was less of an issue because WC3 games are pretty long and boring, same goes for dota (fucking 1 hour reps with nothing happening omg) while SC has 15-20 min., 30 min. max reps that are full of action
On average wc3 games are shorter than SC games. Also wc3 games are full of action, you might not understand whats going on, but it is constant back and forth (if the players are any good). Also once again in dota there is plenty going on, it is just DOTA.
Anyway im sure this feature will be out for release if people ask for it when beta comes out. Everyone needs a chill pill. How many different ways does Browder have to word "We will change almost anything in beta if the fans want it"?
Wow. What happened to releasing a complete and polished game? First customizable hotkeys, now this. And who knows how long of a list exists for things they plan to work out during beta, such as latency issues. Is beta going to last as long as it needs to or is that list just going to get cut short when the deadline comes?
I really just can't understand how these two statements coexist: "We won't give a release date because we're not going to release it until it's ready and we don't know when that is." "We like that feature and we want it to be in the game but it won't be there at release."
Even if you say that they can't have everything that they want at release or the game will never be released, there's such a thing called polish. The more things in at release, especially things that people definitely expect from a 2009/2010 RTS, the more polished the game is and the bigger the initial wave will be.
Seriously. SC2 may be (and probably is) a great game, but the old Blizzard wouldn't be leaving out what seems to be a growing list of features just to hit a release date. I understand that certain aspects take time, but just saying that they will work on it later seems like the *non-Blizzard* way out. This attitude seems to be a common theme with their development as well starting with the split campaigns (we will just work on the others later), custom hot keys (add them in later), LAN (don't even try to add that), and now online replays. Blizzard has a reputation for not releasing a game until it is ready even if it means delaying it until it is a little past the optimum window and although I know most people just want to play the game, I would rather see them release a complete package and come out swinging instead of empty promises that they will just "add it later".
On July 06 2009 10:46 danieldrsa wrote: Is possible to watch a replay with more than one person on SC1? Im not being sarcastic, its serious, i dont know this is possible.
Well, im still happy, so far i saw only improvements: rep rewind, no patch problems, observer features, and built in voice chat.
Yes... you just make a game and where you would select map you select the replay.
People can join the game and download it from you that way and then you can all watch it at the same time.
On July 06 2009 10:46 danieldrsa wrote: and built in voice chat.
They confirmed voice chat a long time ago, but now a recent interview said they're "still on the fence" about voice chat.
Also yes you can watch SC:BW replays with friends on bnet.
False. I spoke with them at blizzcon about the possibility of voice chat and they came back with well why bother implementing it when players already have vent which does a great job? Why bother trying to create something integrated when the benchmark is already set so high with vent.
I don't want voice chat personally it would be annoying with random people, and if you would turn it off you might not hear something that is important for the game.
What happened to blizzard not releasing the game until it's "finely polished?" Everyone talks about their reputation for taking the time to get things right, but lately with this game there's been topic after topic with interviews saying "this won't be shipped, that will be added at a later time," etc.
Really, wtf, this is a serious blow, and if this was any other game I would probably say "fuck that, I'll wait until they actually have some features in place until I buy the game."
I love Blizzard and I love Starcraft, but I love it because you can play it on LAN with friends, you can play it online - you can play together, share replays etc.
Sorry, but without LAN and Replays online I won't purchase it ! Like Warcraft 3.. Replays offline - what a joke..
This is VERY VERY disappointing not having multiplayer replays online... omg... how can they not do it.... rewind?? screw that.... WE NEED MULTIPLAYER REPLAYS!!!!!
On July 06 2009 09:38 baldr83 wrote: To both Trezeguet23 and Psychobabas- Not being able to watch replays together over bnet is not the same as not being able to share replays over bnet. Just pointing that out.
How are replays shared in Warcraft3 over battle.net? Sorry, I dont know, dont play Warcraft 3
On July 06 2009 16:36 p4NDemik wrote: What happened to blizzard not releasing the game until it's "finely polished?" Everyone talks about their reputation for taking the time to get things right, but lately with this game there's been topic after topic with interviews saying "this won't be shipped, that will be added at a later time," etc.
Really, wtf, this is a serious blow, and if this was any other game I would probably say "fuck that, I'll wait until they actually have some features in place until I buy the game."
I don't think whether viewing replays online solely determines if a game is polished or not.
Blizzard have deadlines just like everyone else even though they spend a considerable more time than most polishing their games. You can't however keep polishing, adding features and tweaking ad infinitum. At some point you have to say enough; we need to get this project out, or you will become the next Duke Nukem Forever.
Starcraft 2 has already been in production for 6 years, that's twice as long as the average AAA title this generation.
Btw "old Blizzard" released Starcraft without replays at all.
On July 06 2009 16:57 Eury wrote: Starcraft 2 has already been in production for 6 years, that's twice as long as the average AAA title this generation.
That is not true, the development started 6 years ago with few people, and then project was frozen becouse of wow, they had game in full development for few years there is nothing amazing about that.
On July 06 2009 16:57 Eury wrote:Btw "old Blizzard" released Starcraft without replays at all.
At that time that feature was unknown. Old blizzard added replay as the first company, and old Blizzard made big public Beta as the first company. New Blizzard looks for what can be cut from features that they were adding in the past, so they can ship the game faster.
On July 06 2009 16:36 p4NDemik wrote: What happened to blizzard not releasing the game until it's "finely polished?" Everyone talks about their reputation for taking the time to get things right, but lately with this game there's been topic after topic with interviews saying "this won't be shipped, that will be added at a later time," etc.
Really, wtf, this is a serious blow, and if this was any other game I would probably say "fuck that, I'll wait until they actually have some features in place until I buy the game."
I don't think whether viewing replays online solely determines if a game is polished or not.
Blizzard have deadlines just like everyone else even though they spend a considerable more time than most polishing their games. You can't however keep polishing, adding features and tweaking ad infinitum. At some point you have to say enough; we need to get this project out, or you will become the next Duke Nukem Forever.
Starcraft 2 has already been in production for 6 years, that's twice as long as the average AAA title this generation.
Btw "old Blizzard" released Starcraft without replays at all.
Yeah, when was vanilla released? Oh yeah, 1998. Solid comparison.
They can have deadlines but this is a MAJOR FEATURE, something everyone took for granted, not something that you should squeeze in at the end, or, even worse, after release.
They can sit around and work the gameplay for months, test it every which way, but if the features aren't there to where I can't enjoy the game fully with my friends then it's missing something very important.
On July 06 2009 16:57 Eury wrote: Starcraft 2 has already been in production for 6 years, that's twice as long as the average AAA title this generation.
That is not true, the development started 6 years ago with few people, and then project was frozen becouse of wow, they had game in full development for few years there is nothing amazing about that.
On July 06 2009 16:57 Eury wrote:Btw "old Blizzard" released Starcraft without replays at all.
At that time that feature was unknown. Old blizzard added replay as the first company, and old Blizzard made big public Beta as the first company. New Blizzard looks for what can be cut from features that they were adding in the past, so they can ship the game faster.
The game development was never halted, they temporary cut back on the staff for a year, yes, but it was never stopped.
You can't just compare the two games then start complaining about how Blizzard have sold out just because they cut out a few features. They have added more than they have cut out. A lot of posters here are starting to sound like old people reminiscing how great everything were back in "their days".
Can we refrain on using the so called old and new Blizzard ? At this point it is borderline trolling.
On July 06 2009 16:36 p4NDemik wrote: What happened to blizzard not releasing the game until it's "finely polished?" Everyone talks about their reputation for taking the time to get things right, but lately with this game there's been topic after topic with interviews saying "this won't be shipped, that will be added at a later time," etc.
Really, wtf, this is a serious blow, and if this was any other game I would probably say "fuck that, I'll wait until they actually have some features in place until I buy the game."
I don't think whether viewing replays online solely determines if a game is polished or not.
Blizzard have deadlines just like everyone else even though they spend a considerable more time than most polishing their games. You can't however keep polishing, adding features and tweaking ad infinitum. At some point you have to say enough; we need to get this project out, or you will become the next Duke Nukem Forever.
Starcraft 2 has already been in production for 6 years, that's twice as long as the average AAA title this generation.
Btw "old Blizzard" released Starcraft without replays at all.
Yeah, when was vanilla released? Oh yeah, 1998. Solid comparison.
They can have deadlines but this is a MAJOR FEATURE, something everyone took for granted, not something that you should squeeze in at the end, or, even worse, after release.
They can sit around and work the gameplay for months, test it every which way, but if the features aren't there to where I can't enjoy the game fully with my friends then it's missing something very important.
Come on, at least try to be reasonable. It isn't a MAJOR FEATURE for most of their customers. It is perhaps a major feature for this forum, but thankfully for Blizzard they don't have to solely rely on Teamliquid when it comes to sales.
Would it be nice if I could view replays online? Sure, but let's try to keep things in perspective; there are a few other things I would miss more if it was left out.
On July 06 2009 16:36 p4NDemik wrote: What happened to blizzard not releasing the game until it's "finely polished?" Everyone talks about their reputation for taking the time to get things right, but lately with this game there's been topic after topic with interviews saying "this won't be shipped, that will be added at a later time," etc.
Really, wtf, this is a serious blow, and if this was any other game I would probably say "fuck that, I'll wait until they actually have some features in place until I buy the game."
I don't think whether viewing replays online solely determines if a game is polished or not.
Blizzard have deadlines just like everyone else even though they spend a considerable more time than most polishing their games. You can't however keep polishing, adding features and tweaking ad infinitum. At some point you have to say enough; we need to get this project out, or you will become the next Duke Nukem Forever.
Starcraft 2 has already been in production for 6 years, that's twice as long as the average AAA title this generation.
Btw "old Blizzard" released Starcraft without replays at all.
Yeah, when was vanilla released? Oh yeah, 1998. Solid comparison.
They can have deadlines but this is a MAJOR FEATURE, something everyone took for granted, not something that you should squeeze in at the end, or, even worse, after release.
They can sit around and work the gameplay for months, test it every which way, but if the features aren't there to where I can't enjoy the game fully with my friends then it's missing something very important.
Come on, at least try to be reasonable. It isn't a MAJOR FEATURE for most of their customers. It is perhaps a major feature for this forum, but thankfully for Blizzard they don't have to solely rely on Teamliquid when it comes to sales.
Would it be nice if I could view replays online? Sure, but let's try to keep things in perspective; there are a few other things I would miss more if it was left out.
I respect that you and other people have different things that you look for in a game, but this is a major blow for me and many others.
OK I dunno where I heard this (might have been at like WC3 launch) that the difference between SC and WC3 is the following: SC is peer to peer B.net while WC3 has to connect to the main Blizzard server before connecting the players (such is the case for 1-1s in WC3 etc.)
I remember there being a discussion about this and people came to the conclusion that this is the reason why we can't watch reps on B.net.
Again this is a wild theory I heard some years ago, so please don't bash me too hard if this is utterly false.
On July 06 2009 16:36 p4NDemik wrote: What happened to blizzard not releasing the game until it's "finely polished?" Everyone talks about their reputation for taking the time to get things right, but lately with this game there's been topic after topic with interviews saying "this won't be shipped, that will be added at a later time," etc.
Really, wtf, this is a serious blow, and if this was any other game I would probably say "fuck that, I'll wait until they actually have some features in place until I buy the game."
I don't think whether viewing replays online solely determines if a game is polished or not.
Blizzard have deadlines just like everyone else even though they spend a considerable more time than most polishing their games. You can't however keep polishing, adding features and tweaking ad infinitum. At some point you have to say enough; we need to get this project out, or you will become the next Duke Nukem Forever.
Starcraft 2 has already been in production for 6 years, that's twice as long as the average AAA title this generation.
Btw "old Blizzard" released Starcraft without replays at all.
Yeah, when was vanilla released? Oh yeah, 1998. Solid comparison.
They can have deadlines but this is a MAJOR FEATURE, something everyone took for granted, not something that you should squeeze in at the end, or, even worse, after release.
They can sit around and work the gameplay for months, test it every which way, but if the features aren't there to where I can't enjoy the game fully with my friends then it's missing something very important.
Come on, at least try to be reasonable. It isn't a MAJOR FEATURE for most of their customers. It is perhaps a major feature for this forum, but thankfully for Blizzard they don't have to solely rely on Teamliquid when it comes to sales.
Would it be nice if I could view replays online? Sure, but let's try to keep things in perspective; there are a few other things I would miss more if it was left out.
I respect that you and other people have different things that you look for in a game, but this is a major blow for me and many others.
I understand that, but I think it is a good chance that this will be patched in quite early on if it doesn't make launch. Bringing this to the attention of Blizzard in a calm and constructive manner hopefully ensues that, while ranting how great everything was 10 years ago like some posters, doesn't do anything good.
Im extremely pleased with no replay feature.. i didnt want it to be in the game till later like what happened 1.08... Blizzard has answered my prayers!
You guys are such replay whores! it will come when the game is nearly broken
On July 06 2009 17:47 Latham wrote: OK I dunno where I heard this (might have been at like WC3 launch) that the difference between SC and WC3 is the following: SC is peer to peer B.net while WC3 has to connect to the main Blizzard server before connecting the players (such is the case for 1-1s in WC3 etc.)
I remember there being a discussion about this and people came to the conclusion that this is the reason why we can't watch reps on B.net.
Again this is a wild theory I heard some years ago, so please don't bash me too hard if this is utterly false.
This aplies to ladder games only, in order to reduce cheating and in no way stops the addition of such a feature.
If all they care is to lunch the game asap, why not launching it now? without balancing so much and just releasing it? anyways if they rebalance now they will need to rebalance later, so its time wasted?
see is the same thing why not including this feature instead of adding it later?
Eury, u have to understand that now 2009 is very different back then 1998, replays were a mere concept, now days u have a lot of social networking and watching reps is one of those main features that connects ppl and helps them enjoy not just the game they are about to play but the game they played few minutes ago, and same when they want to enjoy the rep of someone else...
What will happen if they suddenly tells u that u cant watch soccer(insert ur fav sport) anymore with ppl, that u need to watch them alone? pretty stupid if u ask me, bc the passion and the joy is always better with more ppl to share, blizzard needs to know that is IS REALLY a major issue, sure they can add it later, but then again not add a lot of stuff like rebalancing later and just release it now?
Come on Blizzard plz add this on release of SC2!!!! if u really care about us the old customers plz do it. thanks.
On July 03 2009 20:08 Eury wrote: Dustin already said that it will be routed similar as Warcraft 3, hence if you are all on LAN it will be routed through the LAN also. You will just authenticate to Battlenet.
The problem with warcraft and starcraft on b.net are not the latencies, few people know this...it's the bandwidth (refresh rate) of the games in b.net mode...LAN mode has a much higher refresh rate, hence much more responsive...the latencies are P2P and are practically null if the players are in some kind of LAN.
If they allow a LAN mode refresh rate (much more bandwidth hungry) for b.net2, the only difference between LAN and b.net will be the authentication. This is NOT the case for warcraft3. I cannot stand the refresh rate of warcraft3 in b.net mode, that's why I only play on garena.
As a WC3 player, this was always a feature that I wanted in WC3. But I can't think of that many times when I would actually want to use it. It would mostly been a way to easily get friends to watch my exciting games, and make sure that they watched it -_-;; I doubt I would have ever watched pro replays in this way.
Basically, I would have used this feature infrequently. I tend to watch replays in "quiet moments" when I'm too tired to actually game. And I'm more than happy to watch them alone. Quite frankly, I prefer to watch TV, movies by myself. But I understand if you would like to have that option available to you.
Besides, you talk of the enjoyment of watching pro matches with friends. It is a lot more fun to watch pro matches live. I'm sure Blizzard will implement some sort of WaaaghTV system in SC2.
I wouldn't really be too fussed at all about the lack of online replays. I'm more interested in how they allow a large audience to watch pro games live.
On July 06 2009 18:52 teapot wrote: I'm sure Blizzard will implement some sort of WaaaghTV system in SC2.
I wouldn't really be too fussed at all about the lack of online replays. I'm more interested in how they allow a large audience to watch pro games live.
I really doubt they will. Otherwise they would have already started to boast.
Yes watching games live is very good extremely with friends, but sometimes when u cant catch a game, or the game is not a progame but the games that u find in the internet in 3rd fan sites like TL.net then u will need a feature like this one to be able to enjoy the replay with ur friends.
Guys in the forums of battle.net i found a thread about this same stuff, lets try to post some concerns about this feature so the ppl can see that its a major feature, and its very important for us... specially for us the SC/BW players.
On July 06 2009 18:34 sgt_cr wrote: If all they care is to lunch the game asap, why not launching it now? without balancing so much and just releasing it? anyways if they rebalance now they will need to rebalance later, so its time wasted?
see is the same thing why not including this feature instead of adding it later?
Eury, u have to understand that now 2009 is very different back then 1998, replays were a mere concept, now days u have a lot of social networking and watching reps is one of those main features that connects ppl and helps them enjoy not just the game they are about to play but the game they played few minutes ago, and same when they want to enjoy the rep of someone else...
What will happen if they suddenly tells u that u cant watch soccer(insert ur fav sport) anymore with ppl, that u need to watch them alone? pretty stupid if u ask me, bc the passion and the joy is always better with more ppl to share, blizzard needs to know that is IS REALLY a major issue, sure they can add it later, but then again not add a lot of stuff like rebalancing later and just release it now?
Come on Blizzard plz add this on release of SC2!!!! if u really care about us the old customers plz do it. thanks.
Yes, when something you have got used to and come to expect is missing you will notice that very much, but for whatever reason Blizzard is prioritizing other new, aswell as old, features in favor of viewing replays online. You may disagree with their prioritizing - which is fair - but it is a bit naive to demand that they delay the game until everything on the wish list is implemented.
They have to draw the line somewhere; because no matter how much manpower, time, money and other resources you spend, you will never get a perfect product (hence why we have patches). I would say that it is already likely that they won't be able to release the game this year, and adding more stuff that must be added before launch on the list, risk delaying the game further and further.
On July 06 2009 19:07 Eury wrote: I would say that it is already likely that they won't be able to release the game this year, and adding more stuff that must be added before launch on the list, risk delaying the game further and further.
I think they will release it this year for sure. Seems to me that is their dead line and they will not move it unless something extreme happens.
On July 06 2009 19:07 Eury wrote: Yes, when something you have got used to and come to expect is missing you will notice that very much, but for whatever reason Blizzard is prioritizing other new, aswell as old, features in favor of viewing replays online. You may disagree with their prioritizing - which is fair - but it is a bit naive to demand that they delay the game until everything on the wish list is implemented.
They have to draw the line somewhere; because no matter how much manpower, time, money and other resources you spend, you will never get a perfect product (hence why we have patches). I would say that it is already likely that they won't be able to release the game this year, and adding more stuff that must be added before launch on the list, risk delaying the game further and further.
The thing is that they say so much that SC2 is going to be geared for e-sports, but then they fail to add some fundamental functions that made SC1 so successful as a e-sport. They have an eager community with huge experience in competitive gaming who would love to give their input and explain what features are of high priority and what features aren't. After all, this is the community they are targeting, it surely would make sense to synchronise their feature list with them? But no, they haven't time, though they somehow do have time to implement gimmicks such as achievements, B.net chat in single player, replay rewinding and so on.
I will like them to say that the feature will be add it later, and they left it out bc of the deadlines and not bc they believe its not useful at all, i just dont want SC2 to be just like W3, i know a lot of ppl that stop playing W3 bc it was boring to watch replays by themselfs (me included).
I can leave with the feature been add later as a patch or something like that... but leaving it out just scares me... a lot.
if u see 10-11page of ppl getting mad bc of this feature not been added then u know that something is wrong, i mean im pretty much sure that ppl will like this feature first before Rewind, Rewind is just a nice to have thingy but this multiplayer/obs replays is major for a lot of ppl.
I would guess that there is a reason you can't watch replays online in wc3 and it is the same reason it is troublesome for them to add online replays to starcraft 2.
So, there is most likely some feature in the wc3 replays that weren't in the starcraft ones which creates problems and it is not that easy to fix.
On July 06 2009 19:37 sgt_cr wrote: I can live with all the MBS, the automining, and all those new UIs features.... but not having replays online at all is just heartbreaking.
On July 06 2009 19:37 sgt_cr wrote: I can live with all the MBS, the automining, and all those new UIs features.... but not having replays online at all is just heartbreaking.
So you are going to kill yourself now..?
We won't have to man, we'll die of broken heart! :p
On July 06 2009 18:52 teapot wrote: As a WC3 player, this was always a feature that I wanted in WC3. But I can't think of that many times when I would actually want to use it. It would mostly been a way to easily get friends to watch my exciting games, and make sure that they watched it -_-;; I doubt I would have ever watched pro replays in this way.
Basically, I would have used this feature infrequently. I tend to watch replays in "quiet moments" when I'm too tired to actually game. And I'm more than happy to watch them alone. Quite frankly, I prefer to watch TV, movies by myself. But I understand if you would like to have that option available to you.
Besides, you talk of the enjoyment of watching pro matches with friends. It is a lot more fun to watch pro matches live. I'm sure Blizzard will implement some sort of WaaaghTV system in SC2.
I wouldn't really be too fussed at all about the lack of online replays. I'm more interested in how they allow a large audience to watch pro games live.
1) Can you really know whether you'd have used it or not? You say you used to watch replays in quiet moments, when too tired to game - that's exactly when I watched replays. Would go something like /f m from person on f list "Hey want to game?" "Nah too tired - rep?" "Sure, gogo!".
2) Yes, waaaghtv is awesome. I hope they add it, at least they haven't denied it yet (but they have denied LAN and replays - so it's a good sign for WaaaghTV).
On July 06 2009 18:11 Stuyvesant wrote: Im extremely pleased with no replay feature.. i didnt want it to be in the game till later like what happened 1.08... Blizzard has answered my prayers!
You guys are such replay whores! it will come when the game is nearly broken
There are replays, you just have to watch them by yourself.
On July 06 2009 19:37 sgt_cr wrote: I can live with all the MBS, the automining, and all those new UIs features.... but not having replays online at all is just heartbreaking.
So you are going to kill yourself now..?
Not yet, im still waiting to see what is Blizzard is going to say about this; besides... who dies bc of a heartbreak?
StorZerg, I've always wanted to know - what does your name mean? I can't think of an english meaning for the word Stor (means "big" in swedish - coincidence?) >_<
On July 06 2009 22:16 FrozenArbiter wrote: StorZerg, I've always wanted to know - what does your name mean? I can't think of an english meaning for the word Stor (means "big" in swedish - coincidence?) >_<
I actually messed my name up. TT its suppose to be StorrZerg (zerg being tribute to JulyZerg and watching him, reason i got into StarCraft)
Storr (Wolf) is a Lir Linked to Finn (human shape changer) whom is a Cheysuli, And they are based off of the Chronicles of the Cheysuli (An 8-volume series) (edit, and o yeah I liked Storr and Finn in the book and what they do, pretty badass guys)
I don't think whether viewing replays online solely determines if a game is polished or not.
Blizzard have deadlines just like everyone else even though they spend a considerable more time than most polishing their games.
No. The new Blizzard/Activision has deadlines. Blizzard released games when they were ready.
Don't be naive. There's no such thing as a company, especially one as big as Blizzard, that has no deadlines. The whole "done when it's done" has always been marketing rhetoric, nothing more. Even though I want certain features to be in at release, even I can admit that they can't just include everything they want at shipping. It takes a lot more to make a game in 2009 than it did in 1998.
I don't think whether viewing replays online solely determines if a game is polished or not.
Blizzard have deadlines just like everyone else even though they spend a considerable more time than most polishing their games.
No. The new Blizzard/Activision has deadlines. Blizzard released games when they were ready.
Don't be naive. There's no such thing as a company, especially one as big as Blizzard, that has no deadlines. The whole "done when it's done" has always been marketing rhetoric, nothing more. Even though I want certain features to be in at release, even I can admit that they can't just include everything they want at shipping. It takes a lot more to make a game in 2009 than it did in 1998.
No I can 100% vouch for Blizzard's "its done when its done" policy
On July 07 2009 01:02 Plexa wrote: No I can 100% vouch for Blizzard's "its done when its done" policy
I find that hard to believe since Wrath of the Lich King had a lot of stuff that was delayed in patches in order to insure a Winter release. WoW players are still waiting for Dance Studios for one, it took them 4 years to finally implement siege weapons and heroes, and WotLK had far less end-game content than The Burning Crusade did. Blizzard games are always polished to a higher standard than other games, but they aren't perfect.
i watched overt 300.000 replays with friends in bw and i 100% think after 1 day there will be enough reps to watch with friends ... what idiots would not implent rep online
I would argue that in a game like WoW there is essentially limitless possibilities for the developers to pursue - it's hard to say when enough is enough and you do have to draw the line somewhere.
On July 07 2009 01:13 Plexa wrote: I would argue that in a game like WoW there is essentially limitless possibilities for the developers to pursue - it's hard to say when enough is enough and you do have to draw the line somewhere.
That's precisely the point I'm making. Both WoW and Bnet 2.0 are going to have limitless possibilities, so you can no longer just say "It'll be done when it's done" since the game would never come out if you did. Blizzard repeats that line to placate the fans, but it's obvious that they can no longer do that as games continue to demand more and more features. I'm not trying to demonize Blizzard here, I'm just being realistic.
I don't think whether viewing replays online solely determines if a game is polished or not.
Blizzard have deadlines just like everyone else even though they spend a considerable more time than most polishing their games.
No. The new Blizzard/Activision has deadlines. Blizzard released games when they were ready.
Don't be naive. There's no such thing as a company, especially one as big as Blizzard, that has no deadlines. The whole "done when it's done" has always been marketing rhetoric, nothing more. Even though I want certain features to be in at release, even I can admit that they can't just include everything they want at shipping. It takes a lot more to make a game in 2009 than it did in 1998.
No I can 100% vouch for Blizzard's "its done when its done" policy
You have to define what done is first. If you mean done as in perfect - you can't either add more stuff to the game or polish the current content any further - I would say no Blizzard game so far can live up to that criteria, because last time I checked all their games have had patches not to mention expansions.
If you mean done as in more polished than most games, then I would say all Blizzard games have lived up to that.
Some posters here seems to have a very naive view about how Blizzard works, or for that matter worked.. If you work on a project with a team you need to have deadlines, it is that simple, period.
Reminds me of the first few months after they released WoW. The game was sooo incomplete and sooooooo buggy that many people called it "the payed Beta phase" :S
Guess Blizzard changed a lot since Broodwar. The worse part it. As bugged as wow it, it still has millions of subscribers. So why change a team that is winning? Starcraft 2 will probably follow wow's steps and will have a lot of broken features hidden beneath a lot of eye-candy.
On July 07 2009 01:41 VIB wrote: Reminds me of the first few months after they released WoW. The game was sooo incomplete and sooooooo buggy that many people called it "the payed Beta phase" :S
Guess Blizzard changed a lot since Broodwar. The worse part it. As bugged as wow it, it still has millions of subscribers. So why change a team that is winning? Starcraft 2 will probably follow wow's steps and will have a lot of broken features hidden beneath a lot of eye-candy.
This post is so horrible misinformed that I really hope that you are trolling.
On July 07 2009 01:41 VIB wrote: Reminds me of the first few months after they released WoW. The game was sooo incomplete and sooooooo buggy that many people called it "the payed Beta phase" :S
Guess Blizzard changed a lot since Broodwar. The worse part it. As bugged as wow it, it still has millions of subscribers. So why change a team that is winning? Starcraft 2 will probably follow wow's steps and will have a lot of broken features hidden beneath a lot of eye-candy.
This post is so horrible misinformed that I really hope that you are trolling.
This post is so deep and insightful that I really believe that you are not trolling.
On July 07 2009 01:41 VIB wrote: Reminds me of the first few months after they released WoW. The game was sooo incomplete and sooooooo buggy that many people called it "the payed Beta phase" :S
Guess Blizzard changed a lot since Broodwar. The worse part it. As bugged as wow it, it still has millions of subscribers. So why change a team that is winning? Starcraft 2 will probably follow wow's steps and will have a lot of broken features hidden beneath a lot of eye-candy.
Well I don't really think Blizzard's philosophy has changed much at all. I've always thought that the whole "Old Blizzard vs. New Blizzard" belief was absolute garbage. It's not that Blizzard is turning greedy, it's just that the gaming industry is evolving, and developers are having to adapt to a world that is changing at a blindingly fast rate.
Games are much more demanding to make nowadays. Just look at the trilogy for example. It's going to have ~90 missions in total, dozens of cinematics both real-time and pre-rendered, and a new way of storytelling previously unheard of in an RTS. I don't blame Blizzard in the least for splitting it up into 3 games, because if you were to go to any RTS company and tell them to create a 90 mission campaign with numerous cinematics that are all completely high quality and polished and stuff it all into one $50 price tag, you would get laughed out of the building.
EDIT: We have it good to have Blizzard as a game company. It's just more of a question to make sure that their priorities are in order, because I don't really want achievements to be the reason why we won't have online replays at launch. I'm just hoping that they have something really good as a replacement.
On July 07 2009 01:41 VIB wrote: Reminds me of the first few months after they released WoW. The game was sooo incomplete and sooooooo buggy that many people called it "the payed Beta phase" :S
Guess Blizzard changed a lot since Broodwar. The worse part it. As bugged as wow it, it still has millions of subscribers. So why change a team that is winning? Starcraft 2 will probably follow wow's steps and will have a lot of broken features hidden beneath a lot of eye-candy.
mmorpgs are by nature more buggy than other games, I don't think that there is any mmorpg launch that weren't called "paid beta".
Wow was certainly not among the worst, the biggest problem was the amount of players since they hadn't anticipated that it would be such a success. It wasn't that buggy, I was there the first day, the login servers and such crashed due to the huge pressure but the second day everything was fine and the whole game was playable. A few minor bugs of course but nothing even close to game breaking.
On July 07 2009 01:41 VIB wrote: Reminds me of the first few months after they released WoW. The game was sooo incomplete and sooooooo buggy that many people called it "the payed Beta phase" :S
Guess Blizzard changed a lot since Broodwar. The worse part it. As bugged as wow it, it still has millions of subscribers. So why change a team that is winning? Starcraft 2 will probably follow wow's steps and will have a lot of broken features hidden beneath a lot of eye-candy.
Well I don't really think Blizzard's philosophy has changed much at all. I've always thought that the whole "Old Blizzard vs. New Blizzard" belief was absolute garbage. It's not that Blizzard is turning greedy, it's just that the gaming industry is evolving, and developers are having to adapt to a world that is changing at a blindingly fast rate.
To be honest, now that I think about it. I think you're right. They're just following the current tendencies.
Guess what we need is a powerful competitor that prioritize costumers better than current game developers to. To set up a better standard to be followed. Why would blizzard bother, when the competition isn't any better? ><
I don't think whether viewing replays online solely determines if a game is polished or not.
Blizzard have deadlines just like everyone else even though they spend a considerable more time than most polishing their games.
No. The new Blizzard/Activision has deadlines. Blizzard released games when they were ready.
Don't be naive. There's no such thing as a company, especially one as big as Blizzard, that has no deadlines. The whole "done when it's done" has always been marketing rhetoric, nothing more. Even though I want certain features to be in at release, even I can admit that they can't just include everything they want at shipping. It takes a lot more to make a game in 2009 than it did in 1998.
No I can 100% vouch for Blizzard's "its done when its done" policy
As any project i think its natural SC2 has a target date to be ready. They are just better producers, as if they feel the project need to be delayed, they delay it. As for companies like *cof EA *cof, if the deadline is near, its absolutely impossible to delay.
I will hold my judgment for when they talk of the Bnet. I think the problem is: they are doing too much interviews, and saying only what we will not have. Better to hold interviews until we have something more concrete about Bnet 2.0
I don't think whether viewing replays online solely determines if a game is polished or not.
Blizzard have deadlines just like everyone else even though they spend a considerable more time than most polishing their games.
No. The new Blizzard/Activision has deadlines. Blizzard released games when they were ready.
Don't be naive. There's no such thing as a company, especially one as big as Blizzard, that has no deadlines. The whole "done when it's done" has always been marketing rhetoric, nothing more. Even though I want certain features to be in at release, even I can admit that they can't just include everything they want at shipping. It takes a lot more to make a game in 2009 than it did in 1998.
No I can 100% vouch for Blizzard's "its done when its done" policy
Wasn't that the policy that they used for starcraft ghost?
WoW was actually the least buggy MMO that had ever been released. Usually MMOs are filled with a ridiculous amount of bugs and are unplayable with lag. You can complain that there are issues after every patch but the majority of those issues are add-on related anyway. And still, the ones that aren't are usually fixed, plus MMOs aren't exactly the same engine as RTS games.
Im sure there will be pay features for BNet 2.0, but I think some of the posts here are off the deep end. Something as simple as $10 for a name change is what I am thinking. Maybe even $5 to reset your stats (to help against smurfs?). Basically, things you don't need what so ever but tons of people will buy anyway.
Starcraft Ghost was being made by a 3rd party company, blizzard gave them the rights to make a starcraft themed game. There is no telling what kind of issues those developers had while making SC:G, and it doesn't say anything about Blizzard other than the fact that they will probably never do that again.
I think I already gave my opinion about the online replay feature, just ask for it in beta and they will likely add it in sooner. Also, Rob Pardo is more of a manager for all blizzard games, I wouldn't take what he says as final when it comes to a relatively small feature like this. He probably knows its on a list of features, and not in the game at the moment, but I would be surprised if he memorized the order on the list of everything that is going in to every blizzard game + all of the other random things he has to keep track of at his job.
On July 07 2009 01:41 VIB wrote: Reminds me of the first few months after they released WoW. The game was sooo incomplete and sooooooo buggy that many people called it "the payed Beta phase" :S
Guess Blizzard changed a lot since Broodwar. The worse part it. As bugged as wow it, it still has millions of subscribers. So why change a team that is winning? Starcraft 2 will probably follow wow's steps and will have a lot of broken features hidden beneath a lot of eye-candy.
This post is so horrible misinformed that I really hope that you are trolling.
It actually isn't. WoW was riddled with a massive amount of bugs at release, and all the raid content they released after the initial launch was bugged. BWL? Gate not opening. AQ40? Impossible C'thun and a boss that required its own loot to beat. Naxx? 4H fight was broken at release too.
I can't speak for the expansions, but that's the history of the game. There's obviously more, like there being raid ending lag spikes server wide, which led to a number of the game's premiere old school guilds (including the one with the first world kill on ragnaros) leaving our server because thaddius became near-impossible to do without dying 8 times if it wasn't 2 am. But that was cool, because the near 1200 people that transferred off our server paid for the new hardware we got 8 months later.
On July 07 2009 01:41 VIB wrote: Reminds me of the first few months after they released WoW. The game was sooo incomplete and sooooooo buggy that many people called it "the payed Beta phase" :S
Guess Blizzard changed a lot since Broodwar. The worse part it. As bugged as wow it, it still has millions of subscribers. So why change a team that is winning? Starcraft 2 will probably follow wow's steps and will have a lot of broken features hidden beneath a lot of eye-candy.
This post is so horrible misinformed that I really hope that you are trolling.
It actually isn't. WoW was riddled with a massive amount of bugs at release, and all the raid content they released after the initial launch was bugged. BWL? Gate not opening. AQ40? Impossible C'thun and a boss that required its own loot to beat. Naxx? 4H fight was broken at release too.
I can't speak for the expansions, but that's the history of the game. There's obviously more, like there being raid ending lag spikes server wide, which led to a number of the game's premiere old school guilds (including the one with the first world kill on ragnaros) leaving our server because thaddius became near-impossible to do without dying 8 times if it wasn't 2 am. But that was cool, because the near 1200 people that transferred off our server paid for the new hardware we got 8 months later.
BWL was buggy for about two weeks. The AQ40 gate worked fine, the problem was the whole server being in one location, a problem they knew and told the community about dozens of times before ever implementing AQ40 (but the community begged for a world event consistantly). Cthun wasn't unbeatable with his own loot, the problem was tentacles spawned in his stomach for awhile and then they removed them. The 4 horseman encounter wasn't bugged, it was built as a ridiculous encounter where you needed 8 tanks, that never changed till wotlk.
you're a shithead -_- seriously don't post like that in here, we already have enough of it
anyways for the people saying that it will be added in later, yeah it probably will, but why release the game without one of the core things in starcraft. it doesn't seem like it would take too long to add either, seeing as how they had it in sc1.
you're a shithead -_- seriously don't post like that in here, we already have enough of it
anyways for the people saying that it will be added in later, yeah it probably will, but why release the game without one of the core things in starcraft. it doesn't seem like it would take too long to add either, seeing as how they had it in sc1.
Just a hunch, but I believe the reason for the delay is that they want to allow the slider based time skip (rewind etc) to function and that is something that BW did not have to deal with. It is also quite possible that they want all those coaching and commentator tools to be usable too, so you could for example draw a circle or lines showing where units should be going, or make a ghost image of a bunker where it would have been better to position it. If my theory is correct, once we do have multiplayer replays, they are going to be epic.
But yeah, they should release SC1 style replays and do updates later for any extra functionality.
you're a shithead -_- seriously don't post like that in here, we already have enough of it
anyways for the people saying that it will be added in later, yeah it probably will, but why release the game without one of the core things in starcraft. it doesn't seem like it would take too long to add either, seeing as how they had it in sc1.
Just a hunch, but I believe the reason for the delay is that they want to allow the slider based time skip (rewind etc) to function and that is something that BW did not have to deal with. It is also quite possible that they want all those coaching and commentator tools to be usable too, so you could for example draw a circle or lines showing where units should be going, or make a ghost image of a bunker where it would have been better to position it. If my theory is correct, once we do have multiplayer replays, they are going to be epic.
But yeah, they should release SC1 style replays and do updates later for any extra functionality.
ah yeah i overlooked that, that is very likely. and i agree with the last part, just have really basic replay ui (speed up, pause) and update the rest of the shit later for viewing a replay with others, and leave all the fancy stuff in single player viewing for now.
On July 07 2009 01:41 VIB wrote: Reminds me of the first few months after they released WoW. The game was sooo incomplete and sooooooo buggy that many people called it "the payed Beta phase" :S
Guess Blizzard changed a lot since Broodwar. The worse part it. As bugged as wow it, it still has millions of subscribers. So why change a team that is winning? Starcraft 2 will probably follow wow's steps and will have a lot of broken features hidden beneath a lot of eye-candy.
This post is so horrible misinformed that I really hope that you are trolling.
It actually isn't. WoW was riddled with a massive amount of bugs at release, and all the raid content they released after the initial launch was bugged. BWL? Gate not opening. AQ40? Impossible C'thun and a boss that required its own loot to beat. Naxx? 4H fight was broken at release too.
I can't speak for the expansions, but that's the history of the game. There's obviously more, like there being raid ending lag spikes server wide, which led to a number of the game's premiere old school guilds (including the one with the first world kill on ragnaros) leaving our server because thaddius became near-impossible to do without dying 8 times if it wasn't 2 am. But that was cool, because the near 1200 people that transferred off our server paid for the new hardware we got 8 months later.
BWL was buggy for about two weeks. The AQ40 gate worked fine, the problem was the whole server being in one location, a problem they knew and told the community about dozens of times before ever implementing AQ40 (but the community begged for a world event consistantly). Cthun wasn't unbeatable with his own loot, the problem was tentacles spawned in his stomach for awhile and then they removed them. The 4 horseman encounter wasn't bugged, it was built as a ridiculous encounter where you needed 8 tanks, that never changed till wotlk.
Uh, BWL was buggy for a lot longer than 2 weeks, and it wasn't just 'buggy' the rest of the content in there wasn't in.
Its pretty obvious you weren't fighting for server/world firsts or doing competitive raiding if that's how long you think the problems were around. C'thun's issues lasted well over 2 months, through over 3 patches.
On July 07 2009 10:12 damenmofa wrote: its ok, they will release replays, customizable hotkeys and right-click in three seperate downloadable content packs for only 9.99$ each!
In response to those arguing Blizzard's prior statement of, 'We will release the game when it's ready,' and 'This feature won't be available at launch,' I am just assuming that to add those features would significantly delay the game. The way I see it, if the game were released January 2010 with some features not in the game, and then they are patched and added in let's say June 2010, who's to say that to add those features for launch wouldn't take until May or June?
In short, we may be getting a game that is lacking some standard features, but unless they decide to charge me to download those features when they are ready, I am fine with this, albeit disappointed.
It actually isn't. WoW was riddled with a massive amount of bugs at release,
List a few of these massive bugs. Not raid ones, as you already drew a distinction.
Are you for rela? You want us to remember specific bugs so you can prove a point over the internet? I reported over 50 bugs on the first few months of wow. Ranging from class abilities not working, quests not working, tradeskill items not working, mobs not working. It was hard to walk around minding your own business for a couple of minutes without finding a bug. Many of these were highly exploitable and a big bunch of the game's early content were trivializable if you knew how to exploit the right bugs. But I don't remember specific details 4 years later to tell you, stop being ridiculous.
Wow was released a highly bugged and incomplete game. And still had millions of loyal subscribers. So don't expect Blizzard to bother to releasing Starcraft 2 complete and well polished. Because from their own experience that doesn't matter too much for their sales. As long as it's filled with hype and eye candy people will buy it anyway.
On July 07 2009 01:41 VIB wrote: Reminds me of the first few months after they released WoW. The game was sooo incomplete and sooooooo buggy that many people called it "the payed Beta phase" :S
Guess Blizzard changed a lot since Broodwar. The worse part it. As bugged as wow it, it still has millions of subscribers. So why change a team that is winning? Starcraft 2 will probably follow wow's steps and will have a lot of broken features hidden beneath a lot of eye-candy.
This post is so horrible misinformed that I really hope that you are trolling.
It actually isn't. WoW was riddled with a massive amount of bugs at release, and all the raid content they released after the initial launch was bugged. BWL? Gate not opening. AQ40? Impossible C'thun and a boss that required its own loot to beat. Naxx? 4H fight was broken at release too.
I can't speak for the expansions, but that's the history of the game. There's obviously more, like there being raid ending lag spikes server wide, which led to a number of the game's premiere old school guilds (including the one with the first world kill on ragnaros) leaving our server because thaddius became near-impossible to do without dying 8 times if it wasn't 2 am. But that was cool, because the near 1200 people that transferred off our server paid for the new hardware we got 8 months later.
BWL was buggy for about two weeks. The AQ40 gate worked fine, the problem was the whole server being in one location, a problem they knew and told the community about dozens of times before ever implementing AQ40 (but the community begged for a world event consistantly). Cthun wasn't unbeatable with his own loot, the problem was tentacles spawned in his stomach for awhile and then they removed them. The 4 horseman encounter wasn't bugged, it was built as a ridiculous encounter where you needed 8 tanks, that never changed till wotlk.
Uh, BWL was buggy for a lot longer than 2 weeks, and it wasn't just 'buggy' the rest of the content in there wasn't in.
Its pretty obvious you weren't fighting for server/world firsts or doing competitive raiding if that's how long you think the problems were around. C'thun's issues lasted well over 2 months, through over 3 patches.
BWL content was always in there, they just closed the gate after vaelastrasz after the first couple of days because it had some bugs. It was only about 2 weeks till the content was back, and some guilds had already cleared it anyway by using uncooked deviant fish to get through the gate. Im sure I wouldn't know this because obviously I wasnt one of the top guilds... right?
No wrong. And you can talk about how the C'thun "problem" lasted 2 months, but the fact was that they changed the encounter so that it was easier. All they did was stop tentacles from spawning in the stomach, thats it. And im not trying to say BWL wasn't buggy, god BWL was sooo buggy, but they fixed most of the problems quickly and realised they messed up.
Regardless an MMO is not like an RTS, as far as bugs or coding goes.
It actually isn't. WoW was riddled with a massive amount of bugs at release,
List a few of these massive bugs. Not raid ones, as you already drew a distinction.
All patch notes are available at the official site. And for the most part bug fixes are listed under their own heading, the rest are considered changes, balancing or fixes
no online replays is incredibly hurting. I loved sc1 watching online replays with a bunch of friends and I absolutely hated that war3 couldn't do that.
Are you for rela? You want us to remember specific bugs so you can prove a point over the internet?
Do you have a problem with backing up what is said?
I reported over 50 bugs on the first few months of wow. Ranging from class abilities not working, quests not working, tradeskill items not working, mobs not working. It was hard to walk around minding your own business for a couple of minutes without finding a bug. Many of these were highly exploitable and a big bunch of the game's early content were trivializable if you knew how to exploit the right bugs. But I don't remember specific details 4 years later to tell you, stop being ridiculous.
I read all of this and the only part that matters is the last.
And a couple quests not working out of the two thousand they had at release? Creeps evading? Do you know what the word "massive" means?
Your problem is hyperbole. WoW's launch was very smooth bug wise.
Either you: a) purposelessly evade most of my post in an ugly troll attempt, or b) you're just not a very bright person and simply didn't understand it, or c) you've got reeeeeaaaalllyyy low standards.
Either way you're not worth it. Believe whatever that makes you happy.
On July 07 2009 17:23 VIB wrote: Either you: a) purposelessly evade most of my post in an ugly troll attempt
I answered the parts of your post that was relevant to the question I asked, that incidentally I did not ask of you. You said you don't even remember 4 years ago so clearly you're in no position to be arguing with me, as I do remember.
On July 07 2009 01:41 VIB wrote: Reminds me of the first few months after they released WoW. The game was sooo incomplete and sooooooo buggy that many people called it "the payed Beta phase" :S
Guess Blizzard changed a lot since Broodwar. The worse part it. As bugged as wow it, it still has millions of subscribers. So why change a team that is winning? Starcraft 2 will probably follow wow's steps and will have a lot of broken features hidden beneath a lot of eye-candy.
This post is so horrible misinformed that I really hope that you are trolling.
It actually isn't. WoW was riddled with a massive amount of bugs at release, and all the raid content they released after the initial launch was bugged. BWL? Gate not opening. AQ40? Impossible C'thun and a boss that required its own loot to beat. Naxx? 4H fight was broken at release too.
I can't speak for the expansions, but that's the history of the game. There's obviously more, like there being raid ending lag spikes server wide, which led to a number of the game's premiere old school guilds (including the one with the first world kill on ragnaros) leaving our server because thaddius became near-impossible to do without dying 8 times if it wasn't 2 am. But that was cool, because the near 1200 people that transferred off our server paid for the new hardware we got 8 months later.
BWL was buggy for about two weeks. The AQ40 gate worked fine, the problem was the whole server being in one location, a problem they knew and told the community about dozens of times before ever implementing AQ40 (but the community begged for a world event consistantly). Cthun wasn't unbeatable with his own loot, the problem was tentacles spawned in his stomach for awhile and then they removed them. The 4 horseman encounter wasn't bugged, it was built as a ridiculous encounter where you needed 8 tanks, that never changed till wotlk.
I'm pretty sure he meant Princess Huhuran who needed her own loot in order for her to be beaten. Or lvl 40 greens. I'm pretty sure that part of the comment wasn't directed at C'Thun (the encounter was changed around at least 3 times after the initial bugfix anyway. They wanted to make the entry easier and not use the screwed up method that guilds came up with - which resulted in a week of unbeatable C'Thun again when everyone got fried at the initiate until they could finally implement the fight startup delay properly - I'm sure you just "forgot" to mention that ). And the 4horsemen had their fair share of bugs with those invisible void zones or whatever the fuck else they were.
Edit: My friend was beta testing WoW, and played from the early days. It HAD a shitton of broken (minor and major) stuff at release. But it's an MMORPG not an RTS, so I don't think that's really relevant.
you're a shithead -_- seriously don't post like that in here, we already have enough of it
anyways for the people saying that it will be added in later, yeah it probably will, but why release the game without one of the core things in starcraft. it doesn't seem like it would take too long to add either, seeing as how they had it in sc1.
Just a hunch, but I believe the reason for the delay is that they want to allow the slider based time skip (rewind etc) to function and that is something that BW did not have to deal with. It is also quite possible that they want all those coaching and commentator tools to be usable too, so you could for example draw a circle or lines showing where units should be going, or make a ghost image of a bunker where it would have been better to position it. If my theory is correct, once we do have multiplayer replays, they are going to be epic.
But yeah, they should release SC1 style replays and do updates later for any extra functionality.
No, you are going too far. This is how the logic chain goes: Blizzard stopped with online replays in wc3. Thus there were some changes sc->wc3 that is the problem. Thus most likely all the extras in sc2 do not have anything to do with this.
Now, what happened between sc and wc3? Well, the wc3 replays have a much better fog of war system, it knows what each player have seen so you can switch between them and see exactly what that player saw. For example if he scouted a structure you will see it and nothing else in the fog even if you moments before had vision on the whole map.
So, in starcraft you are an observer of two bots playing with instructions recorded in the rep. In wc3 the replay system is a lot different from the normal game to allow for these things making them very different. So you can't just turn of these things and it would work online, you would have to create it again from scratch. Or of course make it compatible with the online system so that it can send the correct information so that others can see what you see.
Also, this is not a standard feature. I think that starcraft is the only RTS in existence with replays being watchable online with friends.
Are you for rela? You want us to remember specific bugs so you can prove a point over the internet? I reported over 50 bugs on the first few months of wow. Ranging from class abilities not working, quests not working, tradeskill items not working, mobs not working. It was hard to walk around minding your own business for a couple of minutes without finding a bug. Many of these were highly exploitable and a big bunch of the game's early content were trivializable if you knew how to exploit the right bugs. But I don't remember specific details 4 years later to tell you, stop being ridiculous.
Wow was released a highly bugged and incomplete game. And still had millions of loyal subscribers. So don't expect Blizzard to bother to releasing Starcraft 2 complete and well polished. Because from their own experience that doesn't matter too much for their sales. As long as it's filled with hype and eye candy people will buy it anyway.
Um, I played it right from release and the only really annoying bug was the loot bug, and the loot bug comes from the server being crowded so it is not technically a bug. BWL and such are not release content so they don't have anything to do with this. And I did raid early and did several server firsts before I got too bored and quit and I did all instances during my levelling period so there isn't much content that I missed.
IMO blizzard has changed way too much... Like, I honestly think SC2 is suppose to attract people that like good graphics and don't care about game play. Because thats the vibe I get just from reading the threads about lan/reps...
On July 07 2009 20:48 Clasic wrote: IMO blizzard has changed way too much... Like, I honestly think SC2 is suppose to attract people that like good graphics and don't care about game play. Because thats the vibe I get just from reading the threads about lan/reps...
Weird, considering when I read more general gaming sites non-SC players tend to complain about that the graphics aren't good enough and it is pretty much Starcraft in 3D, nothing new.
you're a shithead -_- seriously don't post like that in here, we already have enough of it
anyways for the people saying that it will be added in later, yeah it probably will, but why release the game without one of the core things in starcraft. it doesn't seem like it would take too long to add either, seeing as how they had it in sc1.
Just a hunch, but I believe the reason for the delay is that they want to allow the slider based time skip (rewind etc) to function and that is something that BW did not have to deal with. It is also quite possible that they want all those coaching and commentator tools to be usable too, so you could for example draw a circle or lines showing where units should be going, or make a ghost image of a bunker where it would have been better to position it. If my theory is correct, once we do have multiplayer replays, they are going to be epic.
But yeah, they should release SC1 style replays and do updates later for any extra functionality.
No, you are going too far. This is how the logic chain goes: Blizzard stopped with online replays in wc3. Thus there were some changes sc->wc3 that is the problem. Thus most likely all the extras in sc2 do not have anything to do with this.
Now, what happened between sc and wc3? Well, the wc3 replays have a much better fog of war system, it knows what each player have seen so you can switch between them and see exactly what that player saw. For example if he scouted a structure you will see it and nothing else in the fog even if you moments before had vision on the whole map.
So, in starcraft you are an observer of two bots playing with instructions recorded in the rep. In wc3 the replay system is a lot different from the normal game to allow for these things making them very different. So you can't just turn of these things and it would work online, you would have to create it again from scratch. Or of course make it compatible with the online system so that it can send the correct information so that others can see what you see.
Also, this is not a standard feature. I think that starcraft is the only RTS in existence with replays being watchable online with friends.
Are you for rela? You want us to remember specific bugs so you can prove a point over the internet? I reported over 50 bugs on the first few months of wow. Ranging from class abilities not working, quests not working, tradeskill items not working, mobs not working. It was hard to walk around minding your own business for a couple of minutes without finding a bug. Many of these were highly exploitable and a big bunch of the game's early content were trivializable if you knew how to exploit the right bugs. But I don't remember specific details 4 years later to tell you, stop being ridiculous.
Wow was released a highly bugged and incomplete game. And still had millions of loyal subscribers. So don't expect Blizzard to bother to releasing Starcraft 2 complete and well polished. Because from their own experience that doesn't matter too much for their sales. As long as it's filled with hype and eye candy people will buy it anyway.
Um, I played it right from release and the only really annoying bug was the loot bug, and the loot bug comes from the server being crowded so it is not technically a bug. BWL and such are not release content so they don't have anything to do with this. And I did raid early and did several server firsts before I got too bored and quit and I did all instances during my levelling period so there isn't much content that I missed.
Most likely you are just talking out of your ass.
Armies of Exigo has online replays.
I have no idea why accurate fog of war would be any different from anything else as far as online reps are concerned - I mean both players are running the same file :C
you're a shithead -_- seriously don't post like that in here, we already have enough of it
anyways for the people saying that it will be added in later, yeah it probably will, but why release the game without one of the core things in starcraft. it doesn't seem like it would take too long to add either, seeing as how they had it in sc1.
Just a hunch, but I believe the reason for the delay is that they want to allow the slider based time skip (rewind etc) to function and that is something that BW did not have to deal with. It is also quite possible that they want all those coaching and commentator tools to be usable too, so you could for example draw a circle or lines showing where units should be going, or make a ghost image of a bunker where it would have been better to position it. If my theory is correct, once we do have multiplayer replays, they are going to be epic.
But yeah, they should release SC1 style replays and do updates later for any extra functionality.
No, you are going too far. This is how the logic chain goes: Blizzard stopped with online replays in wc3. Thus there were some changes sc->wc3 that is the problem. Thus most likely all the extras in sc2 do not have anything to do with this.
Now, what happened between sc and wc3? Well, the wc3 replays have a much better fog of war system, it knows what each player have seen so you can switch between them and see exactly what that player saw. For example if he scouted a structure you will see it and nothing else in the fog even if you moments before had vision on the whole map.
So, in starcraft you are an observer of two bots playing with instructions recorded in the rep. In wc3 the replay system is a lot different from the normal game to allow for these things making them very different. So you can't just turn of these things and it would work online, you would have to create it again from scratch. Or of course make it compatible with the online system so that it can send the correct information so that others can see what you see.
Also, this is not a standard feature. I think that starcraft is the only RTS in existence with replays being watchable online with friends.
On July 07 2009 11:53 VIB wrote:
On July 07 2009 11:26 Daniri wrote:
It actually isn't. WoW was riddled with a massive amount of bugs at release,
List a few of these massive bugs. Not raid ones, as you already drew a distinction.
Are you for rela? You want us to remember specific bugs so you can prove a point over the internet? I reported over 50 bugs on the first few months of wow. Ranging from class abilities not working, quests not working, tradeskill items not working, mobs not working. It was hard to walk around minding your own business for a couple of minutes without finding a bug. Many of these were highly exploitable and a big bunch of the game's early content were trivializable if you knew how to exploit the right bugs. But I don't remember specific details 4 years later to tell you, stop being ridiculous.
Wow was released a highly bugged and incomplete game. And still had millions of loyal subscribers. So don't expect Blizzard to bother to releasing Starcraft 2 complete and well polished. Because from their own experience that doesn't matter too much for their sales. As long as it's filled with hype and eye candy people will buy it anyway.
Um, I played it right from release and the only really annoying bug was the loot bug, and the loot bug comes from the server being crowded so it is not technically a bug. BWL and such are not release content so they don't have anything to do with this. And I did raid early and did several server firsts before I got too bored and quit and I did all instances during my levelling period so there isn't much content that I missed.
Most likely you are just talking out of your ass.
Armies of Exigo has online replays.
I have no idea why accurate fog of war would be any different from anything else as far as online reps are concerned - I mean both players are running the same file :C
I just meant that it is not just like playing a game like it were in sc so making it available with multiple persons at the same time is not just to slap it on there. And they didn't think that it was a big issue since it weren't in wc3, but I guess that if you whine a lot about it they might alter their priorities.
That is my goal Like, if they really are aware that it's an important feature and STILL decided to push it back, then they obviously have their reasons.
What I'm hoping is that they thought it was "not a big deal at all" so decided to not focus on it, but putting it in isn't a huge problem.
About starcraft replays. A replay is basically just a database of commands to where and when which were issued by the player. I don't see how this messes up with the fog of war system.
How this cannot be synced online with war3/tft or even sc2 fails me. Perhaps it has todo that everyone and I mean everyone who plays brood war has the same screen resolution and more. And makes it much more complicated to have the game sync more easily. But than again, this can't be an issue when I look at the fact that those people can still play against each other...
On July 08 2009 04:49 Boertie wrote: About starcraft replays. A replay is basically just a database of commands to where and when which were issued by the player. I don't see how this messes up with the fog of war system.
How this cannot be synced online with war3/tft or even sc2 fails me. Perhaps it has todo that everyone and I mean everyone who plays brood war has the same screen resolution and more. And makes it much more complicated to have the game sync more easily. But than again, this can't be an issue when I look at the fact that those people can still play against each other...
Arrgg shoot me...
The deal is that if you switch between the views of different players you will see the map exactly as if it was on their screen so you know exactly what they know. Nothing in the normal game works like this meaning that you need a lot of new parameters, so it is not just like observing a game played by bots who gets their instructions from the rep file.
Getting stuff like that into multiplayer would require a fair bit of extra coding.