| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (28)

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 8:24PM Falcon6 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
No hands being burnt is always a good thing.

I mean, do you realize how the griddle would be after that? Your food would taste like hand.

Hand never tastes good.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 9:01PM Bolts said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Nothing wrong with a bit of sweet pork
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 8:27PM Ashkental said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm usign Real ID in SC2, I like it a lot, can chat with my friends in wow and sc2, I don't have any problem because they're all my friends, I understand that in forum that would suck a lot, but it IS a nice feature and you guys gotta agree.

Hell, in facebook you show your name for more than 100+ million people...
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 8:39PM Falcon6 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Ashkental

Real ID will always be awesome to me, as long as it stays in game and I can choose when to use it. (I want friends to see it. No one else)

Real ID in the forum was a horrible idea. At least, the way they were planning to use it. If it was opt-in via the privacy options to either be your WoW character or Starcraft ID, or show your real name, then I can see it going okay...the people that want it can have it and the people that don't won't have to have it.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 8:58PM Themoreyouknow said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Ashkental
What they should've done is what too few companies do - let the consumers in on feedback. It could've been easy to make a poll "Do you want real names shown in forums?" I'm sure they could have had the same outcome without the work wasted in actually making the changes that would never come to be.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 9:04PM Bolts said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Themoreyouknow
My guess is the higher ups demanded this change or one like it, and in order to derail the fail the lower-downs followed their orders their logical conclusion (I want to say "consplosion")
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 9:11PM BananaBoat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Ashkental - The dirty little secret of the entire plan (supposedly) is that they were trying to set up a Facebook-esque social structure, with all of the advertising dollars that come with being able to data mine posts using gamers real names.

Whether that is true or not, I have no idea. I don't think they went through the trouble of coming up with this idea in order to "civilize the forum discourse" or whatever reason they gave out when this all imploded in their faces though.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 8:28PM Wiizer said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report

I wish they would've went through with it.

Nothing like watching a good train wreck... or a dog walking on its hind legs.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 8:34PM den69 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
+1 to you Griffin lol
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 8:35PM galacticronin said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
I think you guys come off a little like dicks with huge sense of entitlement with this article Joystiq. God forbid these artists and developers learn from their mistakes.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 8:37PM Acosta02 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@galacticronin

I think you sound a lot like a dick with no understanding of jokes or common sense.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 8:37PM Acosta02 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
P.S. If you're wondering, I didn't say you "come off like a dick" because the thought horrified me.
Reply

Posted: Jul 29th 2010 9:33AM Unvrfd said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"God forbid these artists and developers learn from their mistakes."
That's one thing. Another is calling these mistakes a social experiment.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 8:35PM EazySCT said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
""We were able to take that feedback, reconsider, consider all the factors, of which feedback was one.""

LOL! This guy is an exec?

"I went to the restaurant to eat again, to eat there, at the restaurant at which I had eaten."
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 8:41PM Falcon6 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@EazySCT

Okay, before I comment on the wording, it does make sense in context, at least. That being said:

I posted a comment on Joystiq, to post it, at Joystiq where I did post a comment?
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 8:43PM PersianSpice said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The fact that they were publicly considering it is the most alarming part of this whole thing.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 8:45PM galacticronin said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Acosta02
I guess I've just never been into making fun of people who don't deserve to be made fun of; especially after they've admitted to doing something wrong and pledging to not doing it anymore.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 9:01PM Acosta02 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@galacticronin

This is a really short article, so I'm not sure how you missed this:

"Ultimately we decided we would not go in that direction for the time being, and see if there were other ways we could address the objective we had, which was to improve the forums generally."

They didn't pledge to not do it anymore, they said they aren't doing it for now. Also maybe they DO deserve to be made fun of; it was pretty obvious to basically everybody that publicly revealing personal information against peoples' wills isn't going to be a popular idea, or a very good one at that.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 9:37PM DaFreak said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I don't really get what the big deal is. I Wouldn't really have had a problem with the system being implemented. In fact i am using my real name on starcraft right now. Koen De Paus.

OH NO NOW THE INTERNET KNOWS MY NAME!
I really don't get what everybody is panicking about. what are all you guys hiding? So what if you can now find my facebook page or twitter account. With a bit of digging you ll prolly be able to find out where i live...

SO FRIGGIN WHAT. My name, phone number and address is in the phone book where everybody can see it. If everybody would use their real names, all those horrible people that have nothing better to do than to spam facebook pages, phones and god knows what else might think twice before doing that, not to mention it would totally lose its fun factor since everybody would be on equal footing. People would act more civilized. Who knows maybe you would even be able to have more meaningful conversations on forums without all that trolling.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 10:02PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Not too bright? The idea is that people who know you or need to contact you can find you in the phone book. Giving your name away means any freak on the internet can find you.

I would rather be trolled on the internet by a random then tracked down and harassed.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 11:11PM DaFreak said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified) I would be more concerned with freaks in your actual real life neighborhood than some random guy on the other side of the world finding it necessary to kill you because you made a certain post in a forum. In fact that doesn't sound very plausible to me at all.

People aren't very good at judging dangers. This should be fairly obvious but there are not more killers on the internet than there are in real life. If everybody uses his real name the danger is pretty much non existent. How would he know who to pic? What would be the difference between being picked out through the internet or on the street? Do you think this killer for some reason only kills people who he finds on the internet? That he has never killed before? Wouldn't it be easier for him to pick someone from the place where he lives?

People are making a huge deal out of nothing. Think about all the benefits a real online identity would bring. From personalized searches. To being able to use this identity in the real world to increase your standard of living. Imo this can't happen soon enough.

people have no problems showing up in an auditorium using their real name and face in front of a thousand strangers. Your average forum doesn't even have that many members...
Reply

Posted: Jul 29th 2010 9:44AM CA said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@DaFreak

I think the general idea is that if some lunatic hates some post you made or some opinion you made they are still anonymous because all they had to do was read what you posted and have a psychotic breakdown, while you on the other hand do have your info posted for said anonymous nut to find/hunt down etc. I do agree that it is unlikely that someone would actually show up at your door but 4chan has easily proven you can be harassed if your identity is found out. That plus the nature of the internet to be polarizing but the Penny Arcade theory mean it's just better to keep things as they are.
Reply

Posted: Jul 31st 2010 7:38PM DaFreak said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@CA Don't get me wrong, I get what you are trying to say. It would be inevitable that there would be some internet related deaths every year. But just like we accept a certain amount of casualties on the road, I believe that in time we will accept a certain amount of internet deaths as well. The benefits will outweigh the cost.

It is hard to say exactly what a combination of geolocation and eID can do because the most interesting, game changing stuff nobody ever sees coming and still needs to be invented but here are a few example, imagine walking into the library, a virtual librarian on a screen on the wall calls for your attention by name and says the newest book from your favorite writer has just come in. It knew you loved him through facebook or whatever.

Imagine walking on the street and all of a sudden your phone starts buzzing. You take it out of your pocket and it asks you whether you are interested in visiting that museum you just walked past because it is having an exhibition on robotic art. Imagine a friend network, something like foursquare 3.0 where you can share places, information, objects,... on a map with everybody who shares the same interests or a network of friends.

What if you could aim your phone at a person from a distance and see what his or her interests are before you go try and hit on them. You might save yourself an hour long talk about knitting. To some people that might sound scary but for me personally it sounds like magic and i want it now.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 9:39PM Gashlycrumb said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i think that's the second time i've read the word "kerfuffle" on joystiq today. kudos to you joystiq.

the new joystiq. meeting all your kerfuffle needs since Jun 2010.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 9:40PM Falcon6 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Brockobama123

Yeah, how DARE they...consider doing something, but then backtrack when the community hates it, showing they're listening to the people. How could they fall so low from 5 years ago to NOW...the...day after they release a highly-acclaimed game.

Those....bastards?
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 9:57PM That Burning Sensation said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Real ID: Blizzard's worst idea. . . ever.
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 10:19PM The Wicker Man said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Every time I hear kerfuffle used in a sentence...From Flight of the Conchords:
My sugalumps are two of a kind
Sweet and white and highly refined
Honeys try all kinds of tomfoolery
To steal a feel of my family jewellery

My candy balls cause a cafuffle
The ladies, they hussle to ruffle my truffle
If you party with the party prince
You get two complimentary after dinner mints
Reply

Posted: Jul 28th 2010 11:49PM Falcon6 said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@Brockobama123

1. Yes, it is a bad thing they thought it was a good idea. I won't deny it because I completely agree. The fact that they didn't go further into action with it is a good thing. You can at least admit that they didn't try to go further along with their plans and that is a good thing.

2. It's not a third of a game. That's like saying Star Wars is a third of a movie. If they can work as a trilogy and they are stand-alone games, then they are basically three games. We don't even know how the games will work when it comes to the Zerg and Protoss games. They could be just single player extensions. And we don't even know if they'll be $60, too. There's a few too many what-ifs to conclude if they're truly thirds of a full game.

3. I really don't know what the big deal is with $10 extra on PC games, anyway. I've been dealing with it on consoles since the 360. It's not a huge concern to me. If the game is worth the time, then it's worth the money, and I haven't heard anything truly BAD about Starcraft II.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW