[QUOTE]
[IMG]http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/bliztech-800x450.jpg[/IMG]
Battle.net has been synonymous with Blizzard for most of the game studio's history, and for good reason: from Diablo onward, the online service helped usher in the concept of free, fully-integrated multiplayer matchmaking. Times have changed, however, and Blizzard is putting the Battle.net name to rest. The underlying technology will remain, but you'll see it referred to simply as Blizzard technology. The Battle.net label is outdated in an era where native multiplayer support is "more of a normal expectation" than a novelty, the developer says. Moreover, the branding is sometimes confusing and redundant. Why does Blizzard have to treat its own service as a separate beast?
The transition should take place over the "next several months."
It's a sad day for longstanding Blizzard fans, but you could also say that it's overdue. The Battle.net name is a holdover from the days when GameSpy, TEN and other third-party services were virtually necessary to join online games for those players not intimately familiar with IP addresses. They lost their main reason for being when many games started treating multiplayer as a central feature, and broadband internet access made it almost trivially easy to find and join matches.
[/QUOTE]
[URL="https://www.engadget.com/2016/09/21/blizzard-dropping-battle-net-name/"]via Engadget[/URL]
I kind of want to be optimistic and hope that it could lead to Blizzard bringing their games onto Steam, or maybe I'm just hoping for way to much these days when it comes to Valve, Blizzard & EA all trying to compete with each other in the digital distribution market.
But battle.net sounds freaking great. There's no need to change it. :why:
[QUOTE=lionheart1066;51087997]I kind of want to be optimistic and hope that it could lead to Blizzard bringing their games onto Steam, or maybe I'm just hoping for way to much these days when it comes to Valve, Blizzard & EA all trying to compete with each other in the digital distribution market.[/QUOTE]
Blizzard isn't really trying to compete with steam or origin though. They're only a developer and the only games on there are blizzard games.
I'm kind of happy with it actually because it's usually not a bloated piece of shit like steam/origin/uplay. Those 3 are kind of social networks that they're hoping you run all of the time but battle.net just has PMs and actual social stuff is in-game.
What are they going to do with their battle.net program? Is that too getting a new name?
[QUOTE=Lazore;51088011]What are they going to do with their battle.net program? Is that too getting a new name?[/QUOTE]
Probably naming it "Blizzard Launcher" "Blizzard Hub" or similar.
[QUOTE=Grandzeit;51088020]Probably naming it "Blizzard Launcher" "Blizzard Hub" or similar.[/QUOTE]
My friends and I have called it blizzard launcher for so long I forget that probably isn't it's official name.
It's a shame, Battle.net sounds so deliciously 90s. Much more exciting than pressumably Blizzard Games, Blizzard Streaming, Blizzard Shop etc etc
[QUOTE=lionheart1066;51087997]I kind of want to be optimistic and hope that it could lead to Blizzard bringing their games onto Steam, or maybe I'm just hoping for way to much these days when it comes to Valve, Blizzard & EA all trying to compete with each other in the digital distribution market.[/QUOTE]
to be honest, i'd prefer it if blizzard started putting steam games on battle.net
as far as pieces of software go, battle.net kicks the shit out of steam - it runs well, the way it downloads updates and games is non-intrusive and simple
the interface is good, the social features are well integrated into their games
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;51088084]to be honest, i'd prefer it if blizzard started putting steam games on battle.net
as far as pieces of software go, battle.net kicks the shit out of steam - it runs well, the way it downloads updates and games is non-intrusive and simple
the interface is good, the social features are well integrated into their games[/QUOTE]
as much as I'd love for overwatch to be on steam, I'd rather see valve remake the steam client first
[QUOTE=Davoc;51088133]as much as I'd love for overwatch to be on steam, I'd rather see valve remake the steam client first[/QUOTE]
Steam needs to be almost entirely rewritten, IMO. It has so many small problems, and a too many large ones.
But that will never happen. At least, not in the foreseeable future.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51088004]Blizzard isn't really trying to compete with steam or origin though. They're only a developer and the only games on there are blizzard games.
I'm kind of happy with it actually because it's usually not a bloated piece of shit like steam/origin/uplay. Those 3 are kind of social networks that they're hoping you run all of the time but battle.net just has PMs and actual social stuff is in-game.[/QUOTE]
And yet it still manages to use more resources than Steam does.
Why on earth would you drop the Battle.net name?
It is straight out associated with Blizzard and nothing else.
Yeah that sucks from a nostalgia perspective. I've known the battle.net name since I was little, playing Diablo 1.
Is Battlenet up for grabs then?
[QUOTE=Grandzeit;51088020]Probably naming it "Blizzard Launcher" "Blizzard Hub" or similar.[/QUOTE]
Blizhub :downs:
maybe because "Battle" is violent or something?
gotta protect the kiddies I guess
[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;51089100]gotta protect the kiddies I guess[/QUOTE]
The word battle isn't that bad.
[t]http://i2.wp.com/www.lazygamer.net/images/2016/08/Omnic-crisis.jpg?resize=800%2C350[/t]
[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;51089100]maybe because "Battle" is violent or something?
gotta protect the kiddies I guess[/QUOTE]
If someone's getting butthurt because the word "battle" is violent I think seeing Blizzards games would drive them to insanity. Not that they're overly violent but they're all about.. battling...
[QUOTE=Noob4life;51089069]Blizzard Tech rhythms with Battle.net... I guess?[/QUOTE]
They're not actually calling it "Blizzard Tech"
Is it just going to [Blizzard service] or some derpy blizzard related pun, the article seems to suggest the former?
[QUOTE=lionheart1066;51087997]I kind of want to be optimistic and hope that it could lead to Blizzard bringing their games onto Steam, or maybe I'm just hoping for way to much these days when it comes to Valve, Blizzard & EA all trying to compete with each other in the digital distribution market.[/QUOTE]
EA and Blizzard aren't trying to compete with Steam for the digital distribution market. The purpose of Origin and Battle.net is to avoid losing a portion of each sale to Valve from the "Steam tax". Companies like GOG are trying to compete with Steam.
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;51089670]EA and Blizzard aren't trying to compete with Steam for the digital distribution market. The purpose of Origin and Battle.net is to avoid losing a portion of each sale to Valve from the "Steam tax". Companies like GOG are trying to compete with Steam.[/QUOTE]
Origin might not compete with Steam directly but it still sells 3rd-party games.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/r1avTtq.png[/IMG]
[QUOTE=lionheart1066;51087997]I kind of want to be optimistic and hope that it could lead to Blizzard bringing their games onto Steam, or maybe I'm just hoping for way to much these days when it comes to Valve, Blizzard & EA all trying to compete with each other in the digital distribution market.[/QUOTE]
So you want Valve to have a total monopoly over the digital market? With their poor customer service record that would be awful.
[QUOTE=Grandzeit;51088003]But battle.net sounds freaking great. There's no need to change it. :why:[/QUOTE]
But it's confusing and complicated to associate two names with one developer. Blizzard [I]and[/I] Battle.net? It's just too much.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
