DOTA 2 Beta Update

Appears Valve let slip some beta patch notes for DOTA 2 on the Team Fortress 2 blog and as always, the Internet caught it before Valve was able to delete the misplaced notes.  Considering it's been since last November that any notes have appeared on the actual DOTA 2 blog, it is nice to know Valve is actively working on the game.  See below:

Google+, the "IT'S BETA!" argument

I suspect us MMOG players will understand Google+'s current fiasco better than most.  After all, GOOGLE PLUS IS STILL IN BETA and just like an MMOG in beta, not all features are going to be there on beta day one and not all promises are going to come to fruition.  This is why most MMOG betas have strict non-disclosure agreements and why MMO bloggers are always screaming "IT'S BETA!".  Google+ doesn't have the NDA luxury currently and the successful launch is quickly turning into a public relations mess.  However, I am willing to give Google+ the benefit of the doubt and I for one am willing to buy the "IT'S BETA!" argument. 

My own Heartless_ Gamer Google+ account was deleted in the name clean up.  In fact, I totally missed the whole "real name" requirement of Google+ and had assumed anonymous and pseudonym use was going to be allowed.  Unfortunately, that is not the case (yet!). 

Google has stated "brand" and "business" accounts are coming.  What they will feature is unknown, so I'm undetermined at this point whether Heartless_ Gamer will exist on Google+.  Hopefully, the brand/business accounts will allow me to operate on Google+ the same as a regular user would with a more of a “webpage” front end for “visitors” to my stream.

A Circular Examination

I really like the Google+ "Circles" which allow contacts to be divided into multiple groups which can be assigned to view content I post.  As a games blogger, with a lot of gamer contacts, I would love to slice and dice them up into different groups.  I could socially tag my content and share it with those I think it is most relevant to.  If I write up a post about Civilization 5, I could share it with my Civ circle and spare my Battlefield group the reading time.

There is a lot of potential in Circles and what we have now in the beta is not guaranteed to be what the final version of Circles will be in Google+.  There was a lot of potential in Hero classes for World of Warcraft, but the idea was nipped during beta.  There was a lot of potential for six capital cities in Warhammer Online, but that as well was trimmed down in beta.  Not everything survives beta.

Circles equate to any feature from any MMOG.  In Google+’s case, Circles are a selling point and are there on day one of the beta.  They may change or may even get pulled.  We don’t know, but through beta testing Google will determine their place and Google+ ends up better because of testing Circles, then we should all say “that’s what beta’s are for”.

And that IS what beta’s are for: improving the end result.  This doesn’t always happen and not every beta is the same (some are marketing stunts).   If we are going to say “that’s what beta’s are for” when they go right, then we need to buy the “IT’S BETA!” argument when the sailing isn’t smooth.  Right now, “IT’S BETA!” is a valid argument for Google+.  Google just better be done with the five year beta cycle.

Tobold's MMORPG Blog: The forum lies

Tobold's MMORPG Blog: The forum lies

Tobold offer's up an excellent analysis of Ben Cousin's (of EA) speech about Battlefield Hero's "pay to win" model.

Weapons for real money were introduced that were better than any weapons you could get by playing, and simultaneously it was made harder to play for free.

I wanted to nitpick something Tobold said:

Thus when the CEO of CCP recently commented the uproar of the EVE community on a similar issue with "I can tell you that this is one of the moments where we look at what our players do and less of what they say", he was completely right. The forum lies.

First, comparing EVE to Battlefield Heroes is an apples to oranges comparison. EVE is and will continue to be a subscription game and unlike most subscription games, EVE ties A LOT of a player's power into how LONG they've been a paying subscriber. BF:H started as and continues to be a free to play game which players can now spend money on to have an advantage.

While BF:H simply changed to make it a bit harder to play the game for free, the proposed changes for EVE threatened to undermine the entire structure upon which the game was built.  To emphasis this point, the EVE changes threatened to undue years of commitment from loyal customers who were PAYING TO PLAY THE GAME. EVE was not in threat of closing.  CCP appeared to be trying to squeeze more money of of their paying players simply because they thought they could.  EVE was not in danger of closing down as BF:H was.

It was not just the forums that were ablaze over the EVE debacle.  It was the entire EVE community, from fan sites to the elected player representatives.  There was a consistent message on all fronts "DON'T FUCKING DO IT CCP".  

Secondly, I would caution that while forums may "lie" in general, there is still valuable feedback to be found amongst the noise.  While only 2% of players may post on the forums, I guarantee there is another 10% that have the same exact complaints and/or feedback as the forum posters.  The danger is that 10% is silent when they leave the game. 

Shut up about EA/Origin

EDIT: Fixed picture as to not break my entire blog layout.

Dancing with Dragons

The following items have been shipped to you by Amazon.com:
--------------------------------------------------------------------

  Qty                           Item    Price         Shipped Subtotal

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Amazon.com items (Sold by Amazon.com, LLC) :

  1  A Dance with Dragons 

Shipped via UPS

--------------------------------------------------------------------