Campaign Creations

I think the locking has more to do with stuff like having to deal with people posting maps with inappropriate video content. But then again, they could just ban these people. But then again it could be a problem related to file size or something.

But this wouldn't be an issue if the maps are made for off-line play.

Maybe we should ask Blizzard why they disabled this stuff.

lol, you think they'd answer?

The content censorship is an easy copout but really if I wanted to break someone's game client/offend someone I could just as easily do it with a texture than a video.

Falchion wrote:- 512 x 512 sized maps
- Ability to support 16-24 terrain brushes
- 5> Terrain height layers

I know you're just listing things that it's ridiculous SC2 doesn't have, but aim higher

GnaReffotsirk wrote:I think the locking has more to do with stuff like having to deal with people posting maps with inappropriate video content. But then again, they could just ban these people. But then again it could be a problem related to file size or something.

They would lock their own maps because people might post other maps with inappropriate video content? Uh, no. That makes little sense. That's like me becoming paranoid about locking my door because some people might graffiti the side of my neighbour's house. There is literally no connection.

GnaReffotsirk wrote:But this wouldn't be an issue if the maps are made for off-line play.

It shouldn't be an issue either way. Little kids exercise their penis fascination on Call of Duty. Maps in StarCraft II with similar fascinations apparent will just be removed, or ignored; or laughed at.

GnaReffotsirk wrote:Maybe we should ask Blizzard why they disabled this stuff.

Maybe Blizzard should have some common sense - something that's rather uncommon these days.

Let's compare Call of Duty's multiplayer features to StarCraft II's! So identical! It's like my car compared to my sandwich. Perfect comparison.

Mexicans own cars?

Lavarinth wrote:Let's compare Call of Duty's multiplayer features to StarCraft II's! So identical! It's like my car compared to my sandwich. Perfect comparison.

I like how you completely missed the point of bringing Call of Duty up in the post.

When someone plays a game as stupid and repetitive as Call of Duty, and when it's populated primarily with pre-teen and early-teen American males, you can expect that there will be phallic fascinations. That is not to say it's right; merely to say that it's to be expected. Insulting minorities on 4chan isn't necessarily 'right', but it is to be expected.

When you contend that StarCraft II has merit as a game that's suitable for all players of the RTS genre, which I have seen you do (although you may have changed your opinion on this), I don't think you immediately thought 'hey, kids are gonna draw dicks everywhere - I hope that shit's censored'. I didn't think that, either, and so I wonder why Blizzard bothered with censorship. The game is rated T/14, so why that needs to even be enforced when you aren't liable for online interactions is just plain stupid. To refrain, a censor on text is one thing. It's stupid, sure, and it has no place in games that have even a degree of psychological maturity, but censoring in-game content just never works.

My original point wasn't even about that, but moreso that Blizzard was being stupid when they decided to lock their triggers and whatnot. I don't know why Kris thought it was about censorship when it's THEIR materials.

Blizzard is liable for all online interactions because there is no local hosting. That's why everything is censored.

There are games without local hosting (dedicated servers, no hosts, etc.) that have the 'Online Interactions not rated' sticker under their rating. Why is SCII different?

Probably something to do with Assinvasion.

Bah, the whole thing is retarded.

Pr0nogo wrote:There are games without local hosting (dedicated servers, no hosts, etc.) that have the 'Online Interactions not rated' sticker under their rating. Why is SCII different?

Because to my knowledge that can only relate to the actions performed by players in game, not what the capabilities of the game's content can do (such as maps). Which is why all this is a problem to start with. If Blizzard had local hosting, then they could of simply argued they cannot filter such content and slap that sticker on, alas this is not the case. They were.. Responsible.