Nameless Voice on 2/8/2010 at 13:37
Can't say I've tried it myself, I generally completely ignore EULAs and pretend that they don't apply to me.
Trance on 2/8/2010 at 16:08
Isn't the "we don't take opened PC games" policy in place because of CD key issues? Once someone obtains the CD key and resells the physical media, whoever bought it has basically been shafted.
Eldron on 2/8/2010 at 16:22
Quote Posted by Nameless Voice
Oh, the game is great, there's no question about that.
The new Battle.net 2.0 is a bit of a train wreck in my opinion, but it seems to be usable thanks to your explanation. It could still brook
a lot of improvements, as it's still missing features that worked fine 12 years ago, and RealID
really needs to be changed to use a user-chosen alias instead of the user's real name.
True, even though people think they won the victory over the real-id thing, they never had any plans to remove that system, most features like cross-game communication will be real-id exclusive and that's probably not the only thing that'll be exclusive to it.
Personally it doesn't bother me, but I can see why others would want those features without having to go real-id.
Another flaw is that if you add someone with real-id, you'll be able to see the names of everyone on his friends-list.
Now with the rest of the battlenet issues, that's a big problem, and for me it's the map publishing and map listings system, but I still have faith in that they'll fix that up.
Nameless Voice on 2/8/2010 at 17:29
Well, personally it doesn't bother me because I created the Battle.net account a while back and it never even occurred to me to put my actual real name down in the name box - I guess I'm a compulsive liar on web forms. Nameless Voice seemed like the appropriate thing to put down for a game-related account.
But it would bother me to have actual real names there, not just for me but also for the people I play with. I don't want to refer them by their real name, and I'm sure a lot of other people are the same. The friends-of-friends thing wouldn't be an issue if it wasn't on a real-name basis - Steam does the exact same thing and no one has a problem with that.
The entire RealID issue could be solved, as I've said before, by just letting people chose their own display name for RealID. Entire problem solved, everyone happy. Except Blizzard, for some reason.
The lack of "browse" button when choosing a map is ridiculous, that needs to be fixed.
There are a few other issues, too, but Blizzard did say that it's early days for Battle.net 2.0 and they intend to improve it a lot in future patches, so there's some hope.
Yakoob on 2/8/2010 at 18:30
Quote Posted by Koki
Yes, the fact that you
can't know it when it comes to videogames is the whole point, thank you.
What? You pretty much can't say "StarCraft 2" outside without ten angry nerds yelling back about RealID. Every single gaming outlet had a story about it, every single online forum had a thread on it. Everybody knew about RealID before purchasing the game.
Also (correct me if I am wrong) but didn't Blizzard pull back on forcing users to use RealID on the forums online and, even though you have one on your account, you are still pretty much just a nickname to everyone unless you CHOOSE to use your real name? How can you sue someone for an optional feature?
Dresden on 2/8/2010 at 20:17
Quote Posted by Nameless Voice
The lack of "browse" button when choosing a map is ridiculous, that needs to be fixed.
There are a few other issues, too, but Blizzard did say that it's early days for Battle.net 2.0 and they intend to improve it a lot in future patches, so there's some hope.
There IS a browse button for maps. For unranked custom games anyway. For ladder games, you can thumbs down a few that you don't like.
Nameless Voice on 2/8/2010 at 20:36
No, there isn't. You can select the maps from the list of available maps, but you can't browse to load a map file on your computer. The only way to play a map file is to "publish" it to Battle.net (outside of opening it in the editor and using the "test map" button).
It's beyond idiotic.
So much so that one of the most popular threads on the forum is " Mapmakers unite against Blizzard!"
Not only that, but Blizzard are apparently randomly deleting maps as being "inappropriate", without warning, giving the author a temp ban and permanently banning them from ever publishing a map again. Without warning or explanation.
Sulphur on 2/8/2010 at 21:34
And to add to the general furore, apparently you can only play maps that are accessible in the Top 50 list? That's pretty amazing if it's true. And you can only play with people in the same region that you've registered your Battle.net account in. Amazing. Blizzard just one-upped region-locked physical media with that dick move.
SO - while I'd like to plunge in headfirst and rhapsodise and wax poetic and swoon and then whine and bitch and moan, I'm not in any sort of hurry to play SC2 because of the above. Also, because I don't intend to let Activision rape my wallet with their wet little limp noodle (hi ho, Kotick!). Digital download for 109 SGD, you say? Why, that's only $80 and 51 cents American. 'tis, as they say, a veritable pittance!
Fuck off and fuck you, Blizzivision.
Nameless Voice on 2/8/2010 at 21:38
I don't think that's quite true. You can play maps that aren't popular, it just only shows you the most popular maps first.
And yes, you can only play in the same region as yourself, but if you'd been following any of the news about the game, you'd have known it was going to ship like that, and that they claim plans to fix this in the near future.
Sulphur on 2/8/2010 at 21:41
I hadn't been because, quite frankly, I wasn't really that interested. And, in the off chance that I would be come the time, I preferred to be unspoilered about it. They'd better fix the region thing, but it's a really poor showing from a company that used to be about delivering their shit as refined and user-friendly as possible, and mostly hassle-free.
