It seems like all this information is a regurgitation of everything that was shown at Blizzcon. Minus the Changeling, which is quite interesting. Sigh, they sure are taking their sweet time with this one. Although it's driving me completely insane, I hope they polish the hell out of this game.
@SublimeAndEtc: You mean Diablo 2? Didn't that come out in 2000? Four years after the original? It seems like the wait for D3 is going on 10 years...just like the pains us Starcraft fans are dealing with haha
@ThisCharmingMan: Yeah this is true. I guess it was the fact that they were teasing D2 right after the first one came out. SC2 has been behind the scenes for the most part (although still obviously coming if you played the secret mission at the end of the first one) until the past couple years, but it probably has been the same amount of time by now.
I guess I've just had other games to satisfy me, but I was a Blizzard fanatic back in the day.
@Asbestos_Underwear: Given all the experience Blizzard has garnered with people trying to work their systems (in WoW, D2 and Starcraft) this must have occurred to them. I'm curious about what kind of authentication/patenting system they've developed to protect their mod market, if any. Doesn't seem like their profits will go far without one.
Die-hard mapmakers and other modders in game never want any money for their creations. I have a feeling that the creators of the best maps will not be charging for them, given the fact that those people never have in any PC game.
I can guarantee you that Blizzard will want some commission out of each sale, which is extremely sleazy if that is the case. Nothing like making money from someone else's work, eh?
Blizzard gives great modders a chance to produce great content and get some payment out of it... instead of producing great content and getting absolutely nothing which is what happens in most cases.
This has the potential to be an awesome way for modders to earn a little extra cash for all the work and love they put into the game. And OF COURSE blizzard is going to get part of the money, they are providing the game and the service.
If you have a good counter-argument, please reply.
As someone who's pouring an extreme amount of effort into becoming a game developer, and also someone who spent some serious time on my own original SC maps this sounds really cool.
To have the ability to make a bit of cash off of my creations thrills me, but I only worry about just how big of a chunk blizz is going to be taking out.
Yeah it's their game and their service, but there's not much point to charging money for your map if you don't end up getting much.
I'd rather have people enjoying and getting nothing but that satisfaction than say charging them 2 bucks for it so that I make 9 cents.
This is a great reward for making so much of the game have to take place online, almost certainly to make it difficult to pirate that game. Honestly, if pirated versions of this game will not be able to access this content it seems that they will be missing half the game. This is exactly the kind of anti-piracy measures the gaming industry should be working toward, not DRM, but rather make amazing features and require you to have a legit copy of the game to access them, via online service and the like.
I am very impressed by the amount of features they are adding into the service. Particularly the stuff regarding the modding community. The idea that it might be possible for the best mods for the game to be hosted and downloaded on and from Battle.net itself is great. I say might, because reading through this it doesn't seem to make explicit mention to much more besides maps.
It seems like a great way to foster community growth for their games, which adds greatly to the value of the games on the service, and at the same time combat game piracy.
@zdevex: GPG has helped the modding community of their games in much the same maner as Blizzard is doing now, perhpas not to the same level of spit and shine. It's great logging in to GPGnet to find out the map that's getting everyone playing or the mod people can't put down.
@zdevex: @Avinant: Are you guys for real? These comments read like pure astroturf.
This is a horrible approach. Removing LAN is petty and pointless. Mandatory Battle.Net is a transparent cashgrab. It will not reduce piracy. This sort of thing never reduces piracy. Spore is a good example of just how massively this behavior FAILS to reduce piracy, ALWAYS.
Starcraft was the last RTS I played for longer than a month. Turns out I STILL play it occasionally, spawning copies onto a couple machines on a LAN. I haven't played on Battle.Net for the better part of a decade, though.
I was excited about this game. I'm sure it will be fun and do very well at retail. But I will probably not buy this one, or at least wait until the crackers and pirates release a fixed EXE that lets me play the game like a customer instead of a presumed criminal.
@alaren: I didn't actually say anything about LAN specifically, but I do agree that it is unfortunate that offline LAN is not going to be in the game. I do understand why Blizzard is removing it, and I can't really say that I blame them. I do think that it will significantly cut back on pirating in the game, I don't think that it will prevent it.
Ideally I agree, forcing gamers to use the game online instead of making it optional is not ideal for anyone, however I completely see why they want to do it this way, and I am happy that they have made so many features available on Battle.net so that using the game exclusively online, at least for multiplayer, is rewarding and enjoyable due to all the extra features they are adding, allowing ease of modding, and fostering community growth.
I do think that the content and features they are making available online are so substantial that people who pirate the game will be missing a lot of the game.
Realistically, it is not going to be very often that people are going to be playing the game in a location without Internet, so I doubt it will much of an inconvenience to have much of the game require online login to play for anyone besides people who pirate the game. Entirely ideal? No. A game crippling problem however? No.
This just in: Blizzard execs announce intention to greet, welcome and accept the Antichrist!
I give up. The activision merger was bad news for the common man, but good news for a few men's bank accounts. At least somebody is happy. Most likely Bobby "Baggins" Kotick.
@pressstart: The game isn't released yet. We have no proof that we won't be able to play without an Internet connection until it hits shelves. Plans change and the build that was demoed was obviously hooked up to the internet to show off the new battle.net. What they didn't show was a copy of the game running without Internet. That was either because that's impossible OR it could be that it was unnecessary because they didn't think people would freak out.
@SacGamer: Blizzard is still a "great" company, but not quite the "same" one at all. I like having more control over something I pay for, is all, so IMO only, I think there's quite a bit wrong with these features. Oh well. This is exactly why Blizz isn't losing any sleep, there's still a zillion-and-one people who will lap this up regardless.
11/20/09
Is that Raynor?
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
What do you mean, "this one?" It's a Blizzard game, isn't it?
11/19/09
#speakup
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
I guess I've just had other games to satisfy me, but I was a Blizzard fanatic back in the day.
11/19/09
"Sir, they're called 'Zerg'"
"Who cares dammit! They're dirty!"
"Uhm, okay, sir. Actually, though, our biggest concern right now are the Protoss."
"Proto-Ass? Are you talking about Jane Fonda? I'm not sure if she was the first, but you're right, that was one fine ass."
"Nevermind, sir, we'll handle it."
11/13/09
08/22/09
online all the time FTL
08/22/09
08/22/09
08/22/09
08/22/09
08/22/09
08/22/09
08/21/09
I can guarantee you that Blizzard will want some commission out of each sale, which is extremely sleazy if that is the case. Nothing like making money from someone else's work, eh?
08/21/09
"This is horrible"?
Seriously?
Blizzard gives great modders a chance to produce great content and get some payment out of it... instead of producing great content and getting absolutely nothing which is what happens in most cases.
This has the potential to be an awesome way for modders to earn a little extra cash for all the work and love they put into the game. And OF COURSE blizzard is going to get part of the money, they are providing the game and the service.
If you have a good counter-argument, please reply.
08/21/09
As someone who's pouring an extreme amount of effort into becoming a game developer, and also someone who spent some serious time on my own original SC maps this sounds really cool.
To have the ability to make a bit of cash off of my creations thrills me, but I only worry about just how big of a chunk blizz is going to be taking out.
Yeah it's their game and their service, but there's not much point to charging money for your map if you don't end up getting much.
I'd rather have people enjoying and getting nothing but that satisfaction than say charging them 2 bucks for it so that I make 9 cents.
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
I am very impressed by the amount of features they are adding into the service. Particularly the stuff regarding the modding community. The idea that it might be possible for the best mods for the game to be hosted and downloaded on and from Battle.net itself is great. I say might, because reading through this it doesn't seem to make explicit mention to much more besides maps.
It seems like a great way to foster community growth for their games, which adds greatly to the value of the games on the service, and at the same time combat game piracy.
08/21/09
08/22/09
This is a horrible approach. Removing LAN is petty and pointless. Mandatory Battle.Net is a transparent cashgrab. It will not reduce piracy. This sort of thing never reduces piracy. Spore is a good example of just how massively this behavior FAILS to reduce piracy, ALWAYS.
Starcraft was the last RTS I played for longer than a month. Turns out I STILL play it occasionally, spawning copies onto a couple machines on a LAN. I haven't played on Battle.Net for the better part of a decade, though.
I was excited about this game. I'm sure it will be fun and do very well at retail. But I will probably not buy this one, or at least wait until the crackers and pirates release a fixed EXE that lets me play the game like a customer instead of a presumed criminal.
08/22/09
Ideally I agree, forcing gamers to use the game online instead of making it optional is not ideal for anyone, however I completely see why they want to do it this way, and I am happy that they have made so many features available on Battle.net so that using the game exclusively online, at least for multiplayer, is rewarding and enjoyable due to all the extra features they are adding, allowing ease of modding, and fostering community growth.
I do think that the content and features they are making available online are so substantial that people who pirate the game will be missing a lot of the game.
Realistically, it is not going to be very often that people are going to be playing the game in a location without Internet, so I doubt it will much of an inconvenience to have much of the game require online login to play for anyone besides people who pirate the game. Entirely ideal? No. A game crippling problem however? No.
08/21/09
I give up. The activision merger was bad news for the common man, but good news for a few men's bank accounts. At least somebody is happy. Most likely Bobby "Baggins" Kotick.
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/22/09
08/22/09