Warcraft 3 and StarCraft sparked a remarkable custom map community.  One would assume that StarCraft 2 would continue this legacy by kicking it up a notch as they’ve done with several of their RTS elements. However, that’s not the case. There are some serious problems.
In WC3 and SC you created a game and it appeared on a list that people saw when they clicked on the “join a custom game” button. Your game was on a list with every other game out there and newer games would appear on the top. This made it rather easy for someone to create a new map and host it because people would see it right there on the top of their list.
The problem is that Blizzard changed how SC2 map hosting works. You upload your maps to Battle.net and then you create a game. However, your game doesn’t appear on a list. When someone wants to join a custom game they are presented with a list that is sorted by MOST POPULAR games.
See the problem? The popular games get pushed way to the top and in order to find any other game you either have to press “See More” and keep pressing it and browse games (again, in order of popularity) or do a specific search for the map.
Custom Map Makers raise a very valid point by asking “How is my map ever supposed to get popular if people do not know it exists?” Aside from praying that lightning strikes for you and you earn some kind of efame, there isn’t a real solution to this problem
The custom map list is full maps that aren’t even necessarily good. In fact, it’s full of games being hosted with the WRONG SETTINGS that break the custom maps. Why? Because they were the first customs to be hosted and people joined and suddenly Bnet considered them popular.
Hopefully there is a solution in the works in the form of an alternate custom map selection screen or a return to the old way of joining and hosting custom maps. Bottom line: The system doesn’t work as it stands now.
Originally there was talk about Blizzard monetizing their custom map system. Perhaps this is just a placeholder until their able to implement this vision. Still, it feels like a failure right now and it definitely overshadows, along with other frustrations like no chat channels, some wonderful things in Battle.net 2.0.
Custom Maps extend the life of Blizzard’s RTS games for me. Long after I stopped playing Warcraft 3’s ladder, I was still playing the custom maps for years.  The community definitely has my support. If we find a good custom map you can bet we’ll share it with our readers and forum community.
I have to agree, their custom game creation system is severely broken. Beyond the “Popular” list, you can only upload 5 custom maps per account (unless that got changed from the Beta — but I’ve heard nothing new about it so I assume it’s the same). You also cannot make custom games from a list of maps you’ve downloaded. If your friend tells you about a map and gives it to you in an e-mail or something (as I used to do with friends, because games were made from a list of maps on your HDD), you have to find it in the Popular list to make the game. Unless you’ve played the map before, then it shows up in the Recently Played list.
I’ll agree that the system is broken, but from what i’ve been reading its only a (short) matter of time before a big push comes out and all the people whining cease doing so.
Thank Act-ard for that. (Activision-Blizzard)
So wait… popularity is based solely on how many people have played a given map? That doesn’t make any sense at all — there should be some sort of rating system there, so players can actually rate each map. Then the maps become “popular” based on how much players like them…
Sounds to me like just another reason to avoid purchasing SC2… =\
Hopefully they’ll figure out a more elegant method than this. I know they’ve tried to Streamline/automate a lot of the things that required you manually do things in SC1, but it is going to have repercussions unless they can manage to come up with some elegant ways of handling it.
The general consensus among the StarCraft fans has been that Battle.net is simply not finished. However, none of us would have wanted the game to be delayed in order to wait on it.
Battle.net is extremely sleek and much more polished, but it’s lacking the simple features. It’s likely that we’ll see a couple patches to expand Bnet.
@Keen: I hope you’re right. I do agree that we’ll pobably see some patches that fix the custom games creation setup, but I read somewhere that “LAN Support” will possibly come with one of the game’s “expansions”. I forget where I read that, but it makes me wonder what other features will be added by expansions rather than by pactches… chat channels anyone?
Lorvax, you are extremely naive to believe Activision has anything to do with Blizzards game design.
@Wren: I would be really shocked if LAN support ever made it back in. Blizzard has shown that they bend under pressure though (real ID thing) so maybe there’s a chance.
Chat Channels had better make it in sooner. For a “social platform”, there’s really zero sociability in the new Battle.net. It’s a lonely place right now. There needs to be chatroom functionality asap.
I finished SC2 a day after it came out. I only play custom maps. For a week now I have been playing the same 5 maps, which got old. I am now going back to Warcraft 3.
Blizzard needs to release the expansion within 6 months or I will not be playing it.
@Achilios: Good luck. The first game was in development for years. However now that the balancing and multiplayer aspect is complete, they really just have to focus on the single-player campaigns. They’ve set a high bar with the WoL campaign. I bet it will be Summer or Winter 2011 before we see Heart of the Swarm, and then another 12-18 months before we see the Void expansion.
@Keen: They really do need chat channels. I remember logging on the other day and seeing “over 923,000 people on Battle.net”. Shame that out of that million people I could only talk to the 12 on my buddy list. Somebody said during beta that they broke down the code for Battle.net and found chat functionality in the “Community” tab, but it obviously didn’t make it in to release.
Yeah, the chat would be nice. Imagine the community building they could accomplish even if they just added a chat room that you join automatically that is for your ladder division? Of course we’d want more functionality for that but I use that specific example just as one I think would be particularly effective.
@Achilios: Sigh.Don’t let the excitement of a freshly released Starcraft 2 overwhelm you.While there are a few glaring Ommisions with battle.net specifically, the actual game is polished and stellar.A few updates can easily rectify the small issues, but hey I guess the best just isn’t good enough for some people.
I tried to message some one the other day after a very successful 4vs4 team game only to realise there is no chat channel, I was a little shocked to say the least ^^.No reason to /quit though, thats for sure.Its still an amazing game.
I find this post a slight bit unreasonable. Of course Blizzard would first focus on the storymode and the core of the multiplayer, since those can’t really be altered in any way until the next expansion. Then we will see a new campaign and greater changes to multiplayer, but mostly what we have now will not change until the expansions in regards to storymode and multiplayer. Of course there will be small balance changes, but nothing much noteworthy.
However, the case is absolutely different with Battle.net. It is extremely easy and effective to add new features, improvements and all kind of things to Battle.net over time (mostly between the expansions, but also some big leaps with both expansions, as is with WoW). It was (IMO) wise to focus first on storymode and multiplayer, then start adding stuff to Battle.net over time. For example, chatrooms and region-free play are coming in the near future, as are undoubtedly improvements to the map publishing system. Also, still coming is the Pro League, clan support and many other great things. Would these have been nice to have from the start? Yes. Would I have wanted to wait another year for all them to be implemented? No. I’m content with having a great storymode and multiplayer right away, and new Battle.net functionality added slowly but steadily. In my opinion, it’s the right order to do things. LAN will likely never be implemented. You know why? Because of Garena. Many I know played WC3 only through Garena, but now it is impossible, so they will have to buy the game. It will of course benefit Blizzard greatly, but also us, because we won’t be seperated to different multiplayer platforms.
That talk about “monetizing” custom maps seems weird. Don’t you know anything else about it than that word? With the first expansion (or around that time) will be released a “Premium Map Publishing” system, where developers can make money with some of their creations. It’s not like every map will cost money, or like Blizzard will make any money with it. There is a small percentage of money that goes to Blizzard for those sales, but it’s only to upkeep the service, not to seriously profit. And the “Premium Maps” must be completely self-done, with custom models, environments, voice acting and music – I seriously doubt any Warcraft 3 custom map would meet all the requirements. I haven’t played them all, but at least not any “popular” map in WC3…
Alot of people are confusing Battle.net2.0 as a game feature of StarCraft 2 when it’s not. B.net 2.0 is the new online suite Blizzard is going to be using with all of their games. Releasing chat channels as a feature of a paid expansion for SC2 is not possible when you take into consideration that Diablo 3 will be using this system too.
B.net2.0 is not Diablo 3 or StarCraft 2. They dependand on one another but lets face it, many games depend on some sort of online software suite now days… ie Steam/XBox Live.
The custom map thing is touchy for me. I never really got into UMS games in SC:BW because the vast majority were bad. Most people don’t know how to make a good map or game. I think a sort of ranking system based on votes would be better. Like a map, thumbs up, don’t like it, thumbs down. Also add a feature to sort games by newest made and you need to be able to filter the UMS through the search. So if it’s “DotA” style or Tower Defense you can filter through searching.
Tyralion:
I agree with some of the points you’re making, but if you think Blizz isn’t planning to profit from the map market place… I dunno where you get that idea. They’re not doing it as some charitable service to the community, they’re doing it to skim some money out of each microtransaction. That’s just how this kind of service work. They’d be insane to set their percentage at cost, when they can set it at cost +5-10% and make a profit… And that’s assuming the best about their motives, I imagine they’ll be taking more like 20-30% or more of each sale.
Also I was quite clear from interviews that they had no plans to include cross-realm play. They said specifically they want you to buy a copy for each region you want to play in. Perhaps it’s changed since late beta, but that’s the last I’d heard.
As a caveat, I’ve played beta and I’ve played release on a trial key, mostly multiplayer but also a bit of the campaign. Overall I just find SC2 to be an incredibly polished but almost completely soulless effort. It’s competent in every way, (ignoring the bnet 2.0 issues) but is just so iterative and unimaginative that I can’t get excited for it. Add to that the fact it’s simply not the kind of game I tend to enjoy, and I feel my ability to be really objective about it is limited. So take what I say with a grain of salt.
I dunno, I just don’t get why people are so happy with a game that doesn’t really do anything new, and is basically just pure polish and nostalgia… I find it bizarre that creativity is given so small a weight in determining the value of a new product.
“We are looking into ways of letting you switch between servers, no matter whether you buy a European or American version of the game. As for the second question you won’t be able to play in the same game using different servers, as we have never had global servers for our games. It is our goal for the future, but won’t be there for release.”
Wasn’t able to find a better quote fast. Anyway, even WoW is region-locked and every other Blizzard game has different servers for different regions, so incoming ability to use other servers with just one client & account seems to negate all your claims about that…
Of course Blizzard will make a BIT of money, but it won’t be any major source of income (compared to actual game sales at least). At most, that small percentage of high quality map sales will generate enough money to upkeep the whole Premium Map Store system. You can think of it as a mini-version of Apple’s App Store, with far greater requirements. Apple does make some money with App Store, but absolutely nothing compared to iPhone sales. You get the point?
It’s a sequel, you know? Not a new franchise in any way… And there are many innovations, such as the new ways to use Zerg Creep, nice ways to use terrain features, and of course the whole singleplayer experience! Real ID is also a very nice feature, as well as achievements and statistics (those nothing extremely new, I know).
I’m ecstatic for the competitive players to learn that they will be allowed to change regions. As I said, I haven’t kept up with it, so I wasn’t certain my info was up to date. Otherwise I was comparing SC2 to BW and war3, which both allowed you to change regions easily on one client – WoW has nothing to to with it. Either way, I’m happy to be wrong on this one.
As for the revenue from premium custom maps, I didn’t look around much but found the following: “Sacconaghi estimated that Apple’s revenue from the App Store is between $60 million and $110 million per quarter. That amount has certainly increased since this research report was published because of the rapid growth of the number of applications….” (http://247wallst.com/2010/01/13/apple-app-store-has-lost-450-million-to-piracy/)
Granted the number of app downloads is much greater than Blizz would see from premium maps – the article estimated 510 million downloads of paid, rather than free, apps since the launch of the service, resulting in an estimated $500 to $700 million in revenue from the app store since launch. The article also agreed with your assessment that the majority of revenue comes from sales of the actual units, which I agree with, but I find it odd to argue $20-40 million a month is “making some money”. Even assuming that Blizz could capture a small fraction of that, why would they pass it up?
Of course without knowing overhead and other costs it’s just impossible to say how lucrative various parts of their product is to Blizzard. Maybe you’re right and they’re doing it at zero cost/profit simply as a favor to the map makers, but that doesn’t make much sense to me from a business standpoint.
As for it being a sequel, new ways to use creep, new terrain features (uh, grass? Xel’Naga tower? I guess), achievements and statistics… yeah that’s what I’m talking about. It’s iterative polish. I just expect more, even from a sequel. Look at Guildwars 2 compared to Guildwars, or Dawn of War2 compared to Dawn of War for what I expect.
Whatever, I realize I’m in the minority here, most people are obviously quite happy with the minimal changes in SC2, and really just wanted more campaign and fancier graphics in their BGH. I don’t begrudge those people at all, I think they got an amazingly polished and completely competent game that will keep them happy for a long time. They’re getting a lot of value for their money, and that’s really a great thing in this age of 5 hour campaigns and $15 map packs.
I have to agree here. I just got the game and the thing I miss the most is not seeing a chat screen on Bnet. I like to look at players profiles/wins loss records etc. You cant seem to do that unless you are friends or you played the guy.
Feels like a lack of community this way. Even in Multiplayer it feels like I am playing AI or something..
Frustrating yes, but I’m sure (or rather hoping) that it will get sorted soon!
Certainly Blizzard will want a bit of revenue from their share of the premium map sales, and it won’t surely be a negative / non-profitable investment for Blizzard – of course they rather want more income than a “pure loss”. I just mean that the main point isn’t to make money with premium map sales, but to actually get the map developers some money and in turn encourage them to create much richer maps / mini-games. That, on the other hand, leads to a greatly added value for Starcraft 2 (without that much of Blizzard’s own work, except creating the Galaxy Editor and premium map sales), and that added value will likely mean much more income to Blizzard in sales for SC2 – much more than the actual premium map sales will generate money. Just look at App Store, once again. True, it makes some millions of money per month, but that is pretty much nothing compared to iOS device sales. However, the premium map marketplace will have a much smaller target audience than the App Store, leading to greatly diminished income in pure share of the map sales. The two can still be compared this way.
I bet most Blizzard fans would NOT want to see that big changes in Starcraft 2. Supreme Commander 2, Command & Conquer 4 and Dawn of War 2 brought with them a great lot of changes to their game series, but, according to most, destroyed the “soul” of those original games. They changed too much, the changes didn’t feel “right” anymore. They were a totally another type of game, no more a true sequel. Fans of the original games felt betrayed, game critics felt “meh”. However, with Starcraft 2, many small things have changed, but the core features (three diverse races, tight balance, lots of macro and map control etc) were left nearly untouched. In my opinion, that’s the right way to do it. Fans of the original game feel mostly happy, game critics are very happy and new players are also happy (most “new” elements are certainly the great storymode and unpolished, but potential-having Battle.net 2.0).
Mostly my comment on the premium map sales was just a response to Keen’s own comment that “Blizzard is just trying to monetize Battle.net” (specifically the maps). I don’t see how this is monetizing, since it’s a completely optional choice for DEVELOPERS to make money, not a major revenue gain for Blizzard. In essence, it serves everyone: developers, consumers and of course Blizzard both directly and indirectly. And it’s not like anything will be taken away, it’s just a new category of (premium) maps unlike ever seen before in Battle.net. DotA would certainly not do, since it has next to none original voice acting, music, models etc.
You’ve taken what I said a bit out of context. The only correlation that I made between maps and monetization was that perhaps this is just a placeholder until that system is implemented.
Ah, alright 🙂 I at first looked at it as “they haven’t yet started monetizing Battle.net, but soon we’ll have to pay Blizzard for most maps” or some stupid stuff like that 🙂 All too often seen in the forums… I just have a problem with that kind of claims, considering that A) certainly only a small percentage of maps will be created as “premium maps”, and they will be of much higher quality than the rest B) the money will not go to Blizzard, but to the developers of those premium maps (and naturally Blizzard will get a small cut, as in App Store, and especially XBox Live etc.etc.).
But I do agree there are some faults in the current implementation of map publishing. However, I truly prefer having dedicated servers compared to peer-to-peer publishing, but still there are just basically no filters (genre etc.), ways to rate maps, other ways to feature good maps than straight popularity and more…
wouldn’t the most played compute out to the most popular?? I understand the problem but that is just a matter of filter enhancing. Request it you may get lucky and get it. Thanks for the post.