Warcarft 3 patch is out

[Anonymous]

"This patch contains various data and code updates necessary for play on Battle.net as well as some minor balance changes."

Balance changes? Still? Jeez......

[Chris Nahr]

Thanks for the pointer. Sounds like another Diablo 2 in the making.

Speaking of Diablo 2, what's up with the 1.10 patch? They promised that one shortly before Dungeon Siege was released (imagine your own reason for that timing) and then it was never heard of again.

[Dave Long]

I guess this is the New Blizzard. Diablo II gets a patch day and date with release and so does Warcraft III. Now we watch as all the fanbois tell us how great it is that Blizzard supports their products!

--Dave

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the pointer. Sounds like another Diablo 2 in the making.

Speaking of Diablo 2, what's up with the 1.10 patch? They promised that one shortly before Dungeon Siege was released (imagine your own reason for that timing) and then it was never heard of again.

I think 1.1 is the release version. That's probably the reason. :)

Peter

[Anonymous]

I think 1.1 is the release version. That's probably the reason. :)

Peter

... of Dungeon Siege, I mean. Not sure about the Diablo II patch.

Peter

[Ben Sones]

I'm not sure what the patch fixed, but I've been playing the game for two weeks now, and have yet to run across a single issue that would require patching. So yeah, it is a typical Blizzard product: runs like a charm under a thick coat of polish.

[Anti-Bunny]

Releasing a game that doesn't need a patch later has to be impossible these days.. There's infinite hardware combinations out there, no way to be sure it works on every one of them.

Unless it's a console game, I guess, but those aren't real games.

[Anonymous]

I just want them to fix those damned Necromancers. At release they rocked, then they were nerfed with every other patch until they were pretty much useless while the idiot player favorites of Sorcs and Barbs were beefed up. Amazons are pretty sick too.

BLAH I say! Assassins rock tho!

[Anonymous]

This is definitely not Diablo II. Warcraft III is running beautifully on Battle.net. Twelve-player games with no lag here. Meanwhile, Diablo II was unplayable online for about two weeks.

Anyone else really impressed with the automated player-matching? The "arrange teams" option is incredibly cool. The game's got a built-in equivalent of AOL Instant Messenger, where you can not only see if your buddies are online, but can see what they're up to (whether in a game or in a chat room). Then you can invite them into an arranged team game, at which point Battle.net automatically throws you in against another arranged team, fast. It's very cool.

I stopped playing Starcraft online because I couldn't stand going through the rigmarole of chatting it up with other players before starting the match... I just wanted to blow up their towns, not talk to them. Finally, I get to do just that.

[Jason McCullough]

'There's infinite hardware combinations out there, no way to be sure it works on every one of them.'

Didn't we go over this a while back? The vast majority of patch fixes have nothing to do with hardware problems.

[Anonymous]

I couldn't stand Starcraft on B.Net cause 90% of the people on that thing are people I don't wanna talk to anyway. I usually played local dial-up games with friends.

[Anonymous]

I couldn't stand Starcraft on B.Net cause 90% of the people on that thing are people I don't wanna talk to anyway. I usually played local dial-up games with friends.

Listen to wumpus - play the games, don't chit-chat!

[Sean Tudor]

I reinstalled Starcraft last night in the hopes of joining a Starcraft game on BattleNet.

It was a big non-event. Both US servers were full of gamers who didn't say a word. Also the games being played all had names with random ASCII characters.

The chat rooms also seemed to be inhabited by bots as they would give random messages every 5 seconds.

Very strange. :?:

[wumpus]

Damn Koreans.