That may be, but people like Destiny are arguing that to make B.net 2.0 you need to add what other games have. Which have casual/user friendly things. Also to add what B.net 1.0 had. Everyone from Diablo, WC and SC want chat channels, channel bots/trivia bots, better ums, clan support, etc. Which B.net 1.0 had.

Which in turn would make it more casual friendly. It's not as if the only way to make a game more casual friendly is to dumb it down. If battle.bet was more like Steam where the main focus is not on their own product(Sc2 1v1 or Valve games in this case) but on the service(Community, Arcade, etc.) there would be a lot more reason for people to use their service. This is how Steam has grown so big and thrives despite only releasing a single game every year or two(if that.) Exposure works and it's why companies spend billions and billions to get people to know their name. More people on Battle.net is more people playing(custom games more than likely) and more importantly watching Sc2.

Unranked ladder in hots fixes this issue, or at least brings it to a happy medium

I know, I was agreeing with Sandman. Just saying what BW had .

oh sorry, I should have taken more time to read this thread lol

ya ofc the side effect would make it more casual friendly

i just mean besides the actual gameplay
sc2 is a failure straight up atm

its wuteva

on Nov 20th i wont give a shit about any of it anymore
will watch gsl on the side and play mah Pside

This post was edited by soullogik on Oct 24 2012 02:09pm

Again this leads to the other issue that Idra/incontrol said. We know what is broken, but what is the solution/best way to go about it. Destiny was wrong to post a post like that on Reddit. It was not helpful and just causes panic/discord in the community. This caused people to bomb Blizzard's twitter. But that does nothing, just makes it seem like we as a community are idiots/children.

Do we talk to Blizzard, who does not seem to listen. They never listen, anyway. As a person who has played Blizzard's Diablo, WC and SC. I have never seen them listen/sponsor events really. Even in BW, all those events were ran by Korean companies/individuals. Blizzard was not really involved other than collecting Royalty money.

Or do we as Idra/Incontrol/Wheat are saying, make the community better ourselves as players (pro/regular gamers). By adding better content, better streams, better tournament/play, etc.

In what way is Sc2 a failure? I keep hearing this but all the complaints are usually a battle.net issue and not a gameplay issue. The only gameplay issue I ever hear is "My race is UP and the other races are OP" which is not legit criticism. It's clearly not a failure if you are going to continue to watch it.

bnet 2.0 is the failure
you said it yourself, valve showed everyone how to create a layout around gameplay & you know i agree

i said game play was actually pretty good in a attempt to succeed bw
even with its flaws
which is why i talk about this game and watch it passionately

This post was edited by soullogik on Oct 24 2012 02:15pm

I am an avid SC player. But I have gameplay qualms. I did not like the meta they have created in SC 2. I really did not like the new units. I rather them have kept BW units and added new units/change the current BW units. But I am not gonna say that is a failure. I just really liked the aspects of BW units/meta.

I think everyone has felt at one time or another that the balling of armies/1 engagement can decide a game to be strange. Especially if you played BW.

No one can deny that SC 2 has a lot of perks that make it easier to macro/micro. Some people hate that about the game. I kinda felt it brings the skill a little down, but not a huge deal.