StarCraft® II

Custom Map Feedback

Posts: 16
I think 1GB would be plenty. my old wc3 custom maps folder, with well over 200 maps, was less then 400MB, And that was from a heck of a lot more then just 1 author. Private game hosting without publishing is a must though. I think the "Open to public" should only be allowed for published maps, that's fine. But some mapmakers like to actually test and fine-tune their map before releasing it for public consumption, and that's currently not even an option.
Posts: 41
LAN and "local custom game" hosting, would just be an invite to the crackers and hackers to make workarounds to play over VPN services.

It would also be an invite for us to have some freedom, play some awesome maps that happen to go over the 20 MB limit, and actually play some of those third-person shooters or top-down maps, which is impossible over battle.net because of how the game works. Unless you don't mind the 1-second delay in input. Go find the bumper cars game if you don't know what I'm talking about.
It also makes the game and its longevity completely reliant on the Blizzard servers.
But punishing paying customers is cool when pirates will still find a way to pirate the game.
Blizzard should be focused on making their online service the option I want to use, which has always been the case prior to now, instead of controlling every aspect and making it the only option available, which just makes it less appealing.
That's actually the reason I bought three copies of SC1 and two of Warcraft 3 after my siblings lost the keys; the online service seemed that great to me. If I actually had any chance of losing my key in SC2, I can say for certain that I wouldn't buy a second copy, because BNet 2.0 just isn't worth that for me.


Edit:
Although it should be added with caution, I think that LAN capabilities should be added to the game, BUT I DON'T think that Blizzard should jeopardize the requirement that all users have a Battle.net account.

This.
Edited by Varis on 8/4/2010 12:17 PM PDT
Posts: 3
I havnt been this disapointed since Spore.
Posts: 16
I think more freedom IS needed, just that adding LAN and local hosting isn't the right way to do it, those "features" have much more far-reaching effects. I agree the map limits and upload limits are ridiculously tiny, and that ANY custom map should be playable, not just published ones, but as my previous post said, make it so unpublished games are invite only. (If they insist on keeping the publishing system at all)

And about the "account required" thing. Wc3 required accounts, but through local hosting, it was worked around to make it so any "local" (since VPNs could make anyone local) player could "piggyback" onto the Bnet servers via a legitimate key just used to host the game.

This was OFTEN a problem which allowed banned and/or hacking users into games and ruining them, and is a major benefit to me for the lack of LAN/Local Hosting. It was a nice feature, but as parents say about children quite often, "This is why we can't have nice things"
Edited by Kaboodle on 8/4/2010 12:22 PM PDT
Posts: 7,026
Posted on behalf of wOlfLinG (EU)

About the popularity system: I've found that it doesn't work very well, to put it politely. If a map-maker uploads a map, there is no way to get it played, other than spamming 'create game' with a friend for over an hour. And even then, it's hard to get it played unless it's a form of Tower Defence or DotA, and has less than 6 players in it. My suggestion would be to go back to custom games lists, making it easy to test maps online. You could add a 'Map Store' to download maps if you still want to keep maps on the battle.net servers, however I think maps should be able to be transferred when someone joins a game. This would also set it up for when you decide to add 'premium' maps by adding a new section into the 'Map store' and only showing premium maps to people who have bought the premium map. If you really wish to keep the popularity system, then add search functions and different ways to find maps rather than just popularity. Eg. add a rating system, sort by newest, A-Z etc.

About the map publishing system: I find the idea good. However, although personally I have not had a problem with it, there is the fact that there is a 'max number of maps' and a size limit. I would say not to entirely remove this, but to get a moderator to quality check all maps over 10mb, or if a person already has 5 maps uploaded. Or do this anyway. That way good maps will get uploaded rather than ones that are small and unbalanced and somehow get to the top. And then stay there due to lack of popularity for better maps. This may be expensive however, so in that case remove the 'per map' size limit, and the 'number of maps uploaded' limit and at least double the 'total map size' limit (from 21mb up to around 50). This means someone who makes a lot of really good melee maps wouldn't have to upload only the best ones, and someone who makes an epic 15mb DotA quality map will be able to upload it.

Doing these would almost completely fix the problems with the map system in my opinion. Although there are also a few things wrong with Bnet on the whole (chat channels, LAN etc), it would at least fix the majority of custom map problems.

wOlfLinG (EU)
Posts: 50
I suggest having a section for maps that are being tested.
Posts: 28
Pretty much what everyone else has been saying, the popularity system is complete garbage that stifles both creativity as well as new maps. Why make a new one that no one will ever play when you can just play Red Circle Tower Defense for the 500th time?

Posts: 40
I'm not in the slightest encouraged to make a map the way things are now. It's quite depressing, the recommendations on this thread are of many concerns I share.


-Manta-
Posts: 258
In order of greatest importance & severity...


Give us a /Maps folder to drop maps into that the game will use.
(AKA, make publishing optional, not mandatory).

I don't always have an internet connection, but I do always want to be able to play my own custom maps. (In fact, that's the only reason I bought this game, and had I known this wasn't going to be an option, I'd have never bought it, nor will I buy any future games). It's way too centralized.

If I can't play my own maps without publishing, then I'm always forced to abide by the inherent limitations of publishing. Publishing only allows 5 maps, 20 MB, and worst of all, I can't name my map whatever I want. It has to be a unique name, even if the map is just intended for my own private use.

BTW, the lack of a SC1 or WC3 style /Maps folder for custom maps is my #1 complaint. I shouldn't need access to your servers to play my own maps. If you fix this, I'd be content, even if you failed to fix the following issues.


Popularity system

It clearly suffers from a tendency to perpetually avoid peer-review. I'll avoid beating a dead horse.


Bridges

Bridges aren't pathable by default, and apparently they require triggers to get working properly. Bridges don't even appear to be a nice descrete category in the editor. Basically, making bridges sucks in SC2. Make bridges work more like they did in WC3. (Your older games shouldn't ever be better at something than your new games).
Edited by Entropy on 8/4/2010 12:40 PM PDT
Posts: 32
Get rid of key press lag... please
Posts: 10
Please GET RID OF the popularity contest. Revert back to the custom titles for custom games that Starcraft 1 had.

I don't want to play the same 25 maps that are on the first page of the popularity list, or wait 30 minutes for enough people to get in the game and be patient enough to wait that long. This popularity system is absurd because unless 1000 people already know about it, no one will ever know about it. I hate it. It is literally killing the creative aspect of map creation, distribution, and popularity potential.

Why can't I see a list of currently open games, perhaps telling me how many are currently in the game and the average ping?
Posts: 3,011
Remove any and all censorship. In a game where you can roast people alive censorship is absolutely ridiculous.

Fix the custom map section by reverting it back to the War3 set-up except with a SC2 aesthetic. It worked far better as the new system is crap.
Posts: 7
Get rid of the popularity system, or at least add the option to host custom games by name like in Warcraft 3 and Starcraft 1.

Give us a maps folder to place maps we download in. I don't want to be able to just host maps on the "popularity list" or that I've recently played. I want to be able to go on a 3rd party website, see a cool custom map, download it, and host it with my friends.

Remove the limits on how many maps an author can publish, it's just limiting the creativity and production of many mapmakers. Also make the size limit on a single map higher. Again, it limits the creativity of mapmakers.

Bring back Play Custom from SC1 and Brood War.

Pretty much, bring back WC3 and SC1's custom map system.
Posts: 25
- Popularity should be a tab not the main choice for picking a game.
- Wc3/Sc1/Diablo style game list would be nice so that map authors have a chance to test their maps; As is, in the current system you cannot get a public test going and only the most popular maps are played. Also adding a custom name to your game (for the list) makes for a better multiplayer experience (seems kind of lonely and dull at the moment).
- Extra storage space would be nice.
- Community stars (or other type of community rating) for maps would be quite useful as well. (as those we saw on blizzcon08).

Further down the line:

- Allow for comments that the author/others can read to receive feedback on their work.
- Remote banks (banks stored on bnet itself) would be an amazing addition.


Thanks for keeping it in mind!
Posts: 14
We REALLY need to be able to upload at least 10 maps, 5 maps is not enough for any melee map maker, not even 10 but it would be a start.
Posts: 41
Get rid of key press lag... please

As far as I know, with all the maps hosted on BNet 2.0, this is not possible. It might not even be possible with peer-to-peer over the internet without some kind of lag interpolation, and I see why that shouldn't be in an RTS game.
So the other option is LAN, which is also unavailable.
Anything that uses the keyboard to move currently isn't viable on BNet 2.0, and not possible anywhere else.

Edit: Which is funny, seeing as those are the kinds of maps Blizzard was "excited" about at Blizzcon.
Edited by Varis on 8/4/2010 1:15 PM PDT
Posts: 93
I'm a supporter of the replacing of the popularity system with # of active games. It would increase the variety by making other maps easier to get on. Sorting by map genre (ie. TD Base Defence, Hero Wars (AKA DotA) and the such) would make the process more enjoyable. Also (I know this is getting annoying with everone saying this) but chatrooms would help get peple into games together. Other then playing with old WoW buddies (I havn't played in years) or the RealID system there doesn't seem to be an easy way of adding friends becuase of the fact it is hard to add people during games (if possible at all after the lobby.)

I know the issues with the Popularity system were discovered too late for you to fix them but if at all possible they need to be patched. They are extremly limitting to the growth and life expectancy of an otherwise great game.
This topic has reached its post limit. You may no longer post or reply to posts for this topic.

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]