Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Wello27 · **Joined:** Aug 2007 **Posts:** 706 **Location:** USA

Read this article.

http://www.the-ghetto.org/content/battl ... confidence

mick3201 · **Joined:** Sep 2009 **Posts:** 390 **Location:**

there's no way im gonna read all of that, summary? :sohappy:

Squirt · **Joined:** Jan 2008 **Posts:** 8186 **Location:**

^ No Public chat
No Lan

Blizzard retaliating by stating they would consider the suggestions of public chat

CrimsonNuker · **Joined:** Aug 2006 **Posts:** 13791 **Location:**

Is this real? What the fuck is going on.

William-CL · **Joined:** Feb 2007 **Posts:** 7363 **Location:** N/A

****, I read a ton of it, then looked to see my scroll bar was like 1/5 the way down. F that. But what I did read what something about preventing piracy pretty much. Which is the fault of everyone looking to pirate games instead of paying for them.

cpinney · **Posted:** Sat Jun 12, 2010 4:10 am

basically

MrJoey · **Posted:** Sat Jun 12, 2010 5:21 am

Don't blame them, blame the blatant piracy that goes on, companies have a right to do what they can to prevent it.

Azilius · **Joined:** Oct 2006 **Posts:** 4236 **Location:** CS:GO

MrJoey wrote:

Don't blame them, blame the blatant piracy that goes on, companies have a right to do what they can to prevent it.

Chat channels, real custom games, tournaments?

piracy? what?

LAN is only thing piracy should affect..

Love · **Joined:** Nov 2007 **Posts:** 5336 **Location:**

Azilius wrote:

MrJoey wrote:

Don't blame them, blame the blatant piracy that goes on, companies have a right to do what they can to prevent it.

Chat channels, real custom games, tournaments?

piracy? what?

LAN is only thing piracy should affect..

I am no longer a battlenet user but this pretty much.

Toshiharu · **Joined:** Feb 2008 **Posts:** 4222 **Location:** Nowhere

Sooner or later people will somehow set up a lan set up. Hopefully..

William-CL · **Joined:** Feb 2007 **Posts:** 7363 **Location:** N/A

Love wrote:

Azilius wrote:

MrJoey wrote:

Don't blame them, blame the blatant piracy that goes on, companies have a right to do what they can to prevent it.

Chat channels, real custom games, tournaments?

piracy? what?

LAN is only thing piracy should affect..

I am no longer a battlenet user but this pretty much.

I agree, as I said I only read to that part, too much for something I don't and won't even play lol.

TOloseGT · **Joined:** Sep 2006 **Posts:** 7129 **Location:**

yea, bnet 2.0 is pretty gay. the sc community has been bitching for quite a while now.

Wello27 · **Joined:** Aug 2007 **Posts:** 706 **Location:** USA

ROFL

Just shows none of you read the article. The articles point was that piracy was an excuse and it's not the actual reason, only what Activision=Blizzard wants you to think.

The point of Battle.net 2.0 is that anything happens, Blizzard either makes a profit or they become owner of. If you have a custom map or mod, you have to use Battle.net 2.0 to share it, and anything that is shared on Battle.net 2.0, Blizzard owns. They can use your creative work to modify, sell themselves, or to use as promotion, and they don't need your permission.

Getting rid of LAN HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PIRACY IDIOTS. The idea behind this is that any tournament or gathering has to go through Battle.net 2.0. Not only that you need permission from Blizzard to use Battle.net 2.0 to do so. So if you want your school to have a lan party, now it's Battle.net 2.0. Not only that, you can't do that unless you get permission from Blizzard or $money. If you host a tournament, same as above and Blizzard takes a cut.

Blizzard becomes the sole controller of all tournaments or SC2 parties. That's what all this is about. Blizzard wanting to become the sole controller of competitive RTS gaming.

SM-Count · **Joined:** Jan 2008 **Posts:** 2761 **Location:** /wave

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

author is a Farking idiot, don't read this, not worth your time at all; go play a game or watch porn instead, much more productive

Wello27 · **Joined:** Aug 2007 **Posts:** 706 **Location:** USA

Figured the maturity of this forum would have been too low for this discussion, but posted it anyways. For others who have reading comprehension, there are plenty of other forums with good discussions that are not deluded into thinking this is a simple DRM effort to fight piracy.

SM-Count · **Joined:** Jan 2008 **Posts:** 2761 **Location:** /wave

There's a very significant difference between you and me, you have reading comprehension, I have reading comprehension and knowledge. See the difference? I'll give you a hint, it's the difference between idiots who understand why that article is terribly written and factually wrong because they know what they're talking about and people who believes the first thing they read because they have nothing to compare it to.

I'll do you a favor and dissect a paragraph to show you why whoever wrote this is a moron:

Quote:

Starcraft II is excellence. It’s sensational. Dustin Browder knew this game was his legacy and his squad delivered. And it’s a Farking shame people are going to turn on this product for things Browder has no control over.

The entire starcraft community (sans retards) has been blaming Browder for Farking up the game, introducing inexplicably large and cumbersome units like the (old)thor and mothership. 3 warpgate proxy pylon pvp, roach v roach into ling bane zvz guessing game, microless pheonixes, deceleration of units so micro is not only hard(not a problem) but not beneficial in some circumstances(big problem), etc.

And then to say Browder doesn't have control over it? It's activision's fault? Well, guess Browder flat out lied in this interview (question 9); make out corporate money to be the culprit with no proof and take all blame off the dev team is retarded, someone on that team decided to do this. Activison didn't write a new bnet 2.0 source code and push into the master repository and clear all logs and histories in the middle of the night and the dev team woke up the next morning and was like "Oh shit, well I guess we're stuck with this now". Were they pressured to find out ways to make more money? I don't know, but it sure is plausible, but saying Browder and his team delivered and has no control over what's going on is not only premature(the former) but plain wrong(the latter).

Quote:

Right now, the Battle.net Forums look like the Battle of the Somme

this is no different from battle.net forums before sc2 so I don't even know why this is written. It's like me saying: "ever since Wemade bought out joymax, all I see in General Discussion on SRF is full of trolls and childish flames, this buy out is the wrong direction for SRO to go."

Quote:

and Starcraft fan site TeamLiquid is trying to disown the game.

TeamLiquid wants SC2 to be the next big thing, they want bnet 2.0 to be better, they want sc2 to be balanced, they want to watch pros change the meta-game and do crazy shit. All the threads that are going "r u gonna boycott sc2!?!?!?!!!?!?!" are made by head-strong 10 post idiots, the sensible people (read: the real Teamliquid) wants sc2 to be a good game before release because there are people who think the game itself is bad (read: browder's fault, not just bnet) and yes, everyone hates bnet 2.0 but I mean, who doesn't, it's too easy. By no means are they trying to disown it, only an imbecile would assume so.

Quote:

The internet has shat a brick. What the hell happened?

exaggeration, w/e, common prop, not important.

Now I guess you could retort that I'm only picking on one sentence and not addressing the guy's main point, and that is true. However to actually address every one of his points would be a gigantic waste of my time and, to be honest, I have porn to watch. This is only to prove, 1) The author is a moron who lies and doesn't fact check, and 2) The article is so full of hoes any idiot who even knew the bare minimum about sc2 would be able to pick it apart ∴ you're Farking stupid.

Understand? Comprehend? I wrote this because, 1) Argentina decided to go on cruise control and 2) I feel there should be PSAs for people so they can be told they're an idiot less they live in ignorance of that fact and decide to call someone else an idiot.

P.S. I guess you are right about the maturity of this forum, being mature is too hard and not very fun.

Azilius · **Joined:** Oct 2006 **Posts:** 4236 **Location:** CS:GO

Wello27 wrote:

Figured the maturity of this forum would have been too low for this discussion, but posted it anyways. For others who have reading comprehension, there are plenty of other forums with good discussions that are not deluded into thinking this is a simple DRM effort to fight piracy.

Wello27 wrote:

ROFL

Getting rid of LAN HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PIRACY IDIOTS. The idea behind this is that any tournament or gathering has to go through Battle.net 2.0. Not only that you need permission from Blizzard to use Battle.net 2.0 to do so. So if you want your school to have a lan party, now it's Battle.net 2.0. Not only that, you can't do that unless you get permission from Blizzard or $money. If you host a tournament, same as above and Blizzard takes a cut.

Ah yes

you are right

William-CL · **Joined:** Feb 2007 **Posts:** 7363 **Location:** N/A

Azilius wrote:

Wello27 wrote:

Figured the maturity of this forum would have been too low for this discussion, but posted it anyways. For others who have reading comprehension, there are plenty of other forums with good discussions that are not deluded into thinking this is a simple DRM effort to fight piracy.

Wello27 wrote:

ROFL

Getting rid of LAN HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PIRACY IDIOTS. The idea behind this is that any tournament or gathering has to go through Battle.net 2.0. Not only that you need permission from Blizzard to use Battle.net 2.0 to do so. So if you want your school to have a lan party, now it's Battle.net 2.0. Not only that, you can't do that unless you get permission from Blizzard or $money. If you host a tournament, same as above and Blizzard takes a cut.

Ah yes

you are right

He obviously doesn't understand that IS the reason they took out LAN lol. IF ppl didn't have to connect to the internet to play, then they would be able to pirate the game still.... and just play on LAN. They do that so ppl using illegitimate copies cannot play the game. However as all games, someone will eventually find a way around that.

TOloseGT · **Joined:** Sep 2006 **Posts:** 7129 **Location:**

SM-Count wrote:

The article is so full of hoes

the article, it's full of hoes, yo

[Orphen] · **Posted:** Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:52 pm

TOloseGT wrote:

SM-Count wrote:

The article is so full of hoes

the article, it's full of hoes, yo

I saw it too hehe.

A book of hoes.

SM-Count · **Joined:** Jan 2008 **Posts:** 2761 **Location:** /wave

I know what I wrote =).

[Orphen] · **Posted:** Tue Jun 15, 2010 4:21 am

SM-Count wrote:

I know what I wrote =).

Yah, still funny tho. Just keep ya hoes in line County.

TOloseGT · **Joined:** Sep 2006 **Posts:** 7129 **Location:**

SM-Count wrote:

I know what I wrote =).

HOE

Skyve · **Joined:** Apr 2006 **Posts:** 7328 **Location:** Canada

Oh my Farking god looked like it went in >:(

MrJoey · **Posted:** Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:40 pm

Skyve · **Joined:** Apr 2006 **Posts:** 7328 **Location:** Canada

MrJoey wrote:

Wut?

Supposed to post in the World Cup thread :palm:

cpinney · **Posted:** Fri Jun 18, 2010 1:49 pm

how do you screw that up lol

Skyve · **Joined:** Apr 2006 **Posts:** 7328 **Location:** Canada

cpinney wrote:

how do you screw that up lol

Well was watching the game then clicked View Your Post and I guess I clicked this thread instead

I didn't even check the thread,was sure it was the WorldCup one.

TOloseGT · **Joined:** Sep 2006 **Posts:** 7129 **Location:**

lmao, i was like "what went in" wut?

Silkroad Online Forums

Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Who is online