Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Discussion about other games: FPS's, MMO's, RTS's, RPG's, PC, console, whatever!
Post Reply
User avatar
Wello27
Active Member
Posts: 706
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 12:49 pm
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: USA

Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by Wello27 »


User avatar
mick3201
Valued Member
Posts: 390
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 6:56 pm
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: Azteca

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by mick3201 »

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

User avatar
Squirt
Forum God
Posts: 8186
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:48 pm
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: Off Topic

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by Squirt »

^ No Public chat
No Lan

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

woutR wrote:Squirt, you're a genius when it comes to raping women.

User avatar
CrimsonNuker
Dom's Slut
Posts: 13791
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 3:31 am
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: guildwars2

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by CrimsonNuker »

Is this real? What the fuck is going on.
ImageImageImage

User avatar
William-CL
Forum Legend
Posts: 7363
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 10:10 am
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: N/A

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by William-CL »

****, 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.
Image

User avatar
cpinney
Ex-Staff
Posts: 5718
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 8:34 am
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: Maine, USA
Contact:

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by cpinney »

basically

Image
Image

User avatar
MrJoey
Elite Member
Posts: 5570
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:44 am
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: Being the forum ritalin

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by MrJoey »

Don't blame them, blame the blatant piracy that goes on, companies have a right to do what they can to prevent it.
Quoted from BuDo
(Except I Am Vegeta cuz we all know he is a used tampon when it comes to his personality)
Image

User avatar
Azilius
Senior Member
Posts: 4236
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:39 pm
Location: CS:GO

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by Azilius »

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..
ImageCrumpets for PresImage

User avatar
Love
Elite Member
Posts: 5330
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:29 pm
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: guildwars2

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by Love »

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.
Image

Guild Wars 2, Isle of Janthir (NA)

Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken.

User avatar
Toshiharu
Senior Member
Posts: 4222
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 1:55 am
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: Nowhere

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by Toshiharu »

Sooner or later people will somehow set up a lan set up. Hopefully..
Image
Image
If being a loser means not playing Silkroad all day.. lulwut?

User avatar
William-CL
Forum Legend
Posts: 7363
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 10:10 am
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: N/A

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by William-CL »

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.
Image

User avatar
TOloseGT
Forum Legend
Posts: 7129
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 4:03 am
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: Venus
Contact:

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by TOloseGT »

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

User avatar
Wello27
Active Member
Posts: 706
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 12:49 pm
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: USA

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by Wello27 »

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.
Last edited by Wello27 on Sat Jun 12, 2010 2:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
SM-Count
Ex-Staff
Posts: 2761
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 7:02 pm
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: /wave

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by SM-Count »

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

User avatar
Wello27
Active Member
Posts: 706
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 12:49 pm
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: USA

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by Wello27 »

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.

User avatar
SM-Count
Ex-Staff
Posts: 2761
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 7:02 pm
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: /wave

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by SM-Count »

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:
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).

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."

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.


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.

User avatar
Azilius
Senior Member
Posts: 4236
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:39 pm
Location: CS:GO

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by Azilius »

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
ImageCrumpets for PresImage

User avatar
William-CL
Forum Legend
Posts: 7363
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 10:10 am
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: N/A

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by William-CL »

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.
Image

User avatar
TOloseGT
Forum Legend
Posts: 7129
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 4:03 am
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: Venus
Contact:

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by TOloseGT »

SM-Count wrote:The article is so full of hoes


the article, it's full of hoes, yo
ImageImage

User avatar
[Orphen]
Loyal Member
Posts: 1749
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 9:59 pm
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: In your house, stealing your Dew.

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by [Orphen] »

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.

User avatar
SM-Count
Ex-Staff
Posts: 2761
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 7:02 pm
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: /wave

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by SM-Count »

I know what I wrote =).

User avatar
[Orphen]
Loyal Member
Posts: 1749
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 9:59 pm
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: In your house, stealing your Dew.

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by [Orphen] »

SM-Count wrote:I know what I wrote =).

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

User avatar
TOloseGT
Forum Legend
Posts: 7129
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 4:03 am
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: Venus
Contact:

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by TOloseGT »

SM-Count wrote:I know what I wrote =).


HOE
ImageImage

User avatar
Skyve
Forum Legend
Posts: 7320
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 4:42 pm
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: Canada

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by Skyve »

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

ExSoldier/Skyve/Loki

what is life even

User avatar
MrJoey
Elite Member
Posts: 5570
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:44 am
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: Being the forum ritalin

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by MrJoey »

Wut?
Quoted from BuDo
(Except I Am Vegeta cuz we all know he is a used tampon when it comes to his personality)
Image

User avatar
Skyve
Forum Legend
Posts: 7320
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 4:42 pm
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: Canada

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by Skyve »

MrJoey wrote:Wut?

Supposed to post in the World Cup thread :palm:
Image

ExSoldier/Skyve/Loki

what is life even

User avatar
cpinney
Ex-Staff
Posts: 5718
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 8:34 am
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: Maine, USA
Contact:

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by cpinney »

how do you screw that up lol
Image

User avatar
Skyve
Forum Legend
Posts: 7320
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 4:42 pm
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: Canada

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by Skyve »

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

ExSoldier/Skyve/Loki

what is life even

User avatar
TOloseGT
Forum Legend
Posts: 7129
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 4:03 am
Quick Reply: Yes
Location: Venus
Contact:

Re: Blizzard Battle.net 2.0: Not so awesome

Post by TOloseGT »

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

Post Reply

Return to “Other Games”