While I don't see the point in deciding to boycott a game based on missed deadlines, I've never really understood the rush to defend a tardy developer either. If you excite a group with a date for a release, beta, whatever, and then miss it, why shouldn't they be disappointed? If you find yourself in the business of constantly breaking the promises you make, maybe you should just shut the fuck up. I don't have anything against Blizzard in particular, but it's a kind of annoying phenomenon of the vidja game industry.
I couldn't agree more. I don't believe they owe me a game now now now and I respect the fact they take as long as they need to get it right, but making deadlines and never meeting them is just bad business practice.
Seriously if you don't know how long it's going to take then just say "I don't know". Bullshitting some date off the top of your head then shooting weeks/months/years past it just seems incredibly unprofessional to me. Not to mention incredibly frustrating for your customers.
I can't imagine many other businesses getting away with the same sort of things games developers pull.
Having said that it's preferable to a botched up rush job ala L4D2. :P
I enjoy Valve pretty much never telling us when things will be done. Of course they have Steam, and are also in the process of taking all my money anyway.
Yes, Blizzard always sticks by the "when its done" answer. But in the unique case of Starcraft 2, its done. It has been done for at least 6 months. I don't know why people are calling the whole battle.net hold-up a "rumor" because Blizzard has openly stated as much.
I am air force, not sure what KATUSA is. I am still living in base billeting, its a pretty bad situation. There are not enough rooms available because all the office workers get the nice rooms and get a single room while all the people who actually work (same rank) are doubled up into the same sized rooms. I am not allowed to have my billeting until I get a room and I can't get internet in billeting I have to walk around base to try and find it and it is always slow in the community areas.
I know a lot of people have it worse but it doesn't make me any less frustrated with this situation.
KATUSA is Korean Augmentation To the United States Army, basically Korean military that lives and works with American military. Built in native speaker/tour guide, but I didn't know if the Air Force has an equivalent.
Also, two people in a small room is the status quo in the Army. I was always jealous of Air Force living conditions.
I figure the whole interfacing with the "stable" WoW servers must be a pain in the ass. It's gonna be hilarious when you can't play SC2 single player because servers are under maintenance.
Maybe Blizzard will finish more than one campaign by the time battle.net is working. If the first campaign has been done for months, hopefully the second one is coming along nicely.
I'm still interested to see how they price the thing.
I'm still interested to see how they price the thing.
Like it matters most who want it would pay what ever it's sold at. $30-$60-$100(ce) doesn't matter its gonna sell to fans who will buy it no matter what.
I'm guessing that the first game, Wings of Liberty, will be full new game price. 50 bucks for PC. Then the Terran and Zerg will probably run around 40 dollars per, since at this point, all 3 games are going to have a huge campaign. I mean, the whole reason they are splitting it up in the first place is because the Terran campaign by itself has as many missions as all of SC1 did by itself.
I am air force, not sure what KATUSA is. I am still living in base billeting, its a pretty bad situation. There are not enough rooms available because all the office workers get the nice rooms and get a single room while all the people who actually work (same rank) are doubled up into the same sized rooms. I am not allowed to have my billeting until I get a room and I can't get internet in billeting I have to walk around base to try and find it and it is always slow in the community areas.
I know a lot of people have it worse but it doesn't make me any less frustrated with this situation.
KATUSA is Korean Augmentation To the United States Army, basically Korean military that lives and works with American military. Built in native speaker/tour guide, but I didn't know if the Air Force has an equivalent.
Also, two people in a small room is the status quo in the Army. I was always jealous of Air Force living conditions.
We don't have anything like KATUSA, the Korean Air Force guys are all pretty weird. The reason I joined the Air Force was for better living conditions :P the army here has the same or better rooms than us, a lot of them do not have to double up.
While I don't see the point in deciding to boycott a game based on missed deadlines, I've never really understood the rush to defend a tardy developer either. If you excite a group with a date for a release, beta, whatever, and then miss it, why shouldn't they be disappointed? If you find yourself in the business of constantly breaking the promises you make, maybe you should just shut the fuck up. I don't have anything against Blizzard in particular, but it's a kind of annoying phenomenon of the vidja game industry.
I couldn't agree more. I don't believe they owe me a game now now now and I respect the fact they take as long as they need to get it right, but making deadlines and never meeting them is just bad business practice.
Seriously if you don't know how long it's going to take then just say "I don't know". Bullshitting some date off the top of your head then shooting weeks/months/years past it just seems incredibly unprofessional to me. Not to mention incredibly frustrating for your customers.
I can't imagine many other businesses getting away with the same sort of things games developers pull.
Having said that it's preferable to a botched up rush job ala L4D2. :P
I enjoy Valve pretty much never telling us when things will be done. Of course they have Steam, and are also in the process of taking all my money anyway.
Saying nothing at all is marginally better than making deadlines and missing them. Mind you its very hard for me to defend Valves silent approach to customer relations after the way they addressed the L4D2 bug concerns (not at all). But as I said the best answer would be "we don't know".
Frankly I'm happy to wait as long as it takes for the to make a battlenet that's as flawless as humanly possible. MW2 has shown me what happens when a good game gets a useless online mode. Having said that if after all this time battlenet is still shitty Blizzard will be on the receiving end of a tsunami of nerd rage.
While I don't see the point in deciding to boycott a game based on missed deadlines, I've never really understood the rush to defend a tardy developer either. If you excite a group with a date for a release, beta, whatever, and then miss it, why shouldn't they be disappointed? If you find yourself in the business of constantly breaking the promises you make, maybe you should just shut the fuck up. I don't have anything against Blizzard in particular, but it's a kind of annoying phenomenon of the vidja game industry.
I couldn't agree more. I don't believe they owe me a game now now now and I respect the fact they take as long as they need to get it right, but making deadlines and never meeting them is just bad business practice.
Seriously if you don't know how long it's going to take then just say "I don't know". Bullshitting some date off the top of your head then shooting weeks/months/years past it just seems incredibly unprofessional to me. Not to mention incredibly frustrating for your customers.
I can't imagine many other businesses getting away with the same sort of things games developers pull.
Having said that it's preferable to a botched up rush job ala L4D2. :P
when the hell did they announce any kind of release date? i only remember "2009".
I'm still interested to see how they price the thing.
Like it matters most who want it would pay what ever it's sold at. $30-$60-$100(ce) doesn't matter its gonna sell to fans who will buy it no matter what.
Like good sheep myself included.
I'm just interested as an outside spectator. I never had a PC until I was in my mid-20s, so I'm pretty much awful with KBAM controls. I only play games that don't require any sort of speed or reflex on the PC, like Baldur's Gate or Dragon Age. RTS is a frustrating experience for me, so I don't see myself ever buying this game. I struggled mightily with WC3 on Normal mode, and was convinced that Age of Empires 2 cheated, and haven't touched an RTS game outside of those.
And when they finally release it you can fund them again.
Meanwhile they'll keep doing what they do.
It's not like they're just fucking with you for kicks. They're actually VERY open about what they're doing with the game at any given time.
They have Q+A sessions all the time. They give details on what they're working on and why. They show us their work.
The first demo they showed for the SC2 announcement and the last build they've shown are almost 2 different games.
I would have liked them to set the record straight on whether or not the most recent set of beta delays were entirely tied to the new Battle.net not being ready. Quite a few SC2 fan sites had said months ago that the hold-ups had little to do with SC2 itself and everything to do with Battle.net.
The fact that the beta was announced for February at the same time they finally unveil the new Battle.net only further supports the rumors.
What exactly is scandalous about the new battle.net having issues and putting off a game beta for it (when the game operates on this new system)? I'll be waiting for a logical answer that matters.
And when they finally release it you can fund them again.
Meanwhile they'll keep doing what they do.
It's not like they're just fucking with you for kicks. They're actually VERY open about what they're doing with the game at any given time.
They have Q+A sessions all the time. They give details on what they're working on and why. They show us their work.
The first demo they showed for the SC2 announcement and the last build they've shown are almost 2 different games.
I would have liked them to set the record straight on whether or not the most recent set of beta delays were entirely tied to the new Battle.net not being ready. Quite a few SC2 fan sites had said months ago that the hold-ups had little to do with SC2 itself and everything to do with Battle.net.
The fact that the beta was announced for February at the same time they finally unveil the new Battle.net only further supports the rumors.
What exactly is scandalous about the new battle.net having issues and putting off a game beta for it (when the game operates on this new system)? I'll be waiting for a logical answer that matters.
Who said "scandalous"?
It's the tone of your post. You talk about them "setting the record straight." Fan sites poking around to find out it's the reason.
Also actiblizzard tho. If it's full game price it's gonna be $59.99 from activision unless they got a whole world of shit about the pricing from retailers.
Also actiblizzard tho. If it's full game price it's gonna be $59.99 from activision unless they got a whole world of shit about the pricing from retailers.
And their other games released this year for PC also were $50 at launch.
I would really enjoy it immensely if they charged $100 for it. The internet shitstorm would be almost as hilarious as when the sales figures were released.
It's a huge draw AAA level sales nearly certain title(like MW2 before it hype wise) I would be shocked to not see it at $59.99 and with a pricier CE version as well(likely $99.99 like WoW CE).
TheUnsane1 on
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
They could probably get away with charging $100 for it and still have plenty of buyers.
Could != Will
Yeah, BUT... it's Starcraft 2. It might as well be a given. They're going to sell a bajillion copies simply because it's Starcraft 2. Everyone at Blizzardvision will probably get a Ferrari based on Asian sales alone. ('Cause they're crazy about their competitive SC)
The new Battle.net stuff looks pretty good. I really hope port forwarding won't be neccesary. Having to do that to host custom games or arranged team matches in Warcraft 3 was kinda annoying.
It's also nice to get confirmation that there will be a Battle.net client so you can check your friends list without having to start up the game.
It's pretty lame the beta won't be running on Macs.
GTFO. Gaming on Macs is far behind anything else and that's telling considering PCs are now redheaded step children of gaming. Why would anything be different in this day and age?
I think people are just angsty because they can't have the game right now, so they try to find tiny things to complain about to vent their frustration.
And when they finally release it you can fund them again.
Meanwhile they'll keep doing what they do.
It's not like they're just fucking with you for kicks. They're actually VERY open about what they're doing with the game at any given time.
They have Q+A sessions all the time. They give details on what they're working on and why. They show us their work.
The first demo they showed for the SC2 announcement and the last build they've shown are almost 2 different games.
I would have liked them to set the record straight on whether or not the most recent set of beta delays were entirely tied to the new Battle.net not being ready. Quite a few SC2 fan sites had said months ago that the hold-ups had little to do with SC2 itself and everything to do with Battle.net.
The fact that the beta was announced for February at the same time they finally unveil the new Battle.net only further supports the rumors.
What exactly is scandalous about the new battle.net having issues and putting off a game beta for it (when the game operates on this new system)? I'll be waiting for a logical answer that matters.
Who said "scandalous"?
It's the tone of your post. You talk about them "setting the record straight." Fan sites poking around to find out it's the reason.
The tone? Alrighty then...
Look at the post to which I replied:
They're actually VERY open about what they're doing with the game at any given time.
Not coming out and saying something about the game's state being good to go to beta but Battle.net being way behind isn't exactly "VERY open."
Posts
I enjoy Valve pretty much never telling us when things will be done. Of course they have Steam, and are also in the process of taking all my money anyway.
KATUSA is Korean Augmentation To the United States Army, basically Korean military that lives and works with American military. Built in native speaker/tour guide, but I didn't know if the Air Force has an equivalent.
Also, two people in a small room is the status quo in the Army. I was always jealous of Air Force living conditions.
I'm still interested to see how they price the thing.
Like it matters most who want it would pay what ever it's sold at. $30-$60-$100(ce) doesn't matter its gonna sell to fans who will buy it no matter what.
Saying nothing at all is marginally better than making deadlines and missing them. Mind you its very hard for me to defend Valves silent approach to customer relations after the way they addressed the L4D2 bug concerns (not at all). But as I said the best answer would be "we don't know".
Frankly I'm happy to wait as long as it takes for the to make a battlenet that's as flawless as humanly possible. MW2 has shown me what happens when a good game gets a useless online mode. Having said that if after all this time battlenet is still shitty Blizzard will be on the receiving end of a tsunami of nerd rage.
I'm just interested as an outside spectator. I never had a PC until I was in my mid-20s, so I'm pretty much awful with KBAM controls. I only play games that don't require any sort of speed or reflex on the PC, like Baldur's Gate or Dragon Age. RTS is a frustrating experience for me, so I don't see myself ever buying this game. I struggled mightily with WC3 on Normal mode, and was convinced that Age of Empires 2 cheated, and haven't touched an RTS game outside of those.
Blizzard doesn't make shitty products. Battle.net 2.0 will not suck.
Quiet, you'll ruin the schadenfreude.
No. I said exactly what I meant. PC games are 50 bucks.
Bioshock 2: 50 bucks
Mass Effect 2: 50 bucks
Star Trek Online: 50 bucks
It's the tone of your post. You talk about them "setting the record straight." Fan sites poking around to find out it's the reason.
Which is quite the outlier, honestly.
Also actiblizzard tho. If it's full game price it's gonna be $59.99 from activision unless they got a whole world of shit about the pricing from retailers.
And their other games released this year for PC also were $50 at launch.
So, again, an outlier.
It ran on PCs, but it was not a PC game
If they think they can charge $60 for each episode, I'm sure they will.
Could != Will
Even though I haven't played it I know exactly what you mean. And agree.
Yeah, BUT... it's Starcraft 2. It might as well be a given. They're going to sell a bajillion copies simply because it's Starcraft 2. Everyone at Blizzardvision will probably get a Ferrari based on Asian sales alone. ('Cause they're crazy about their competitive SC)
Robots Will Be Our Superiors (Blog)
http://michaelhermes.com
Sit Rep?
Robots Will Be Our Superiors (Blog)
http://michaelhermes.com
It's also nice to get confirmation that there will be a Battle.net client so you can check your friends list without having to start up the game.
GTFO. Gaming on Macs is far behind anything else and that's telling considering PCs are now redheaded step children of gaming. Why would anything be different in this day and age?
Honestly, it's like this thread is pretty much about people trying to find crap to complain about now.
Yeah, Blizzard is really on the ball with providing Mac compatible games, I can't think of a game they made that isn't playable on the Mac.
I don't understand why people are bitching so much about this game, it'll probably be really good, should just wait and play it.
edit: ahahaha i didn't read the post above subedii's, i love the internet
THE INTERNET LOVES YOU BACK!
:P
Look at the post to which I replied:
Not coming out and saying something about the game's state being good to go to beta but Battle.net being way behind isn't exactly "VERY open."