I get the impression that not many people here stayed active in SC2, because most of the UI layout we're seeing so far mimics LotV-era SC2 closely. I happen to think that UI flows very well, and it's actually a lot more social than I expected and certainly more than SC2 ever was before, from my experience with it dumping me automatically into the chats for Co-op or Arcade when I switch to those respective selection screens. It's one of the better out-of-the-box chat designs out of Blizzard these days, if we're looking at it abstractly.
My concern with the WC3 screenshots we're seeing is that the UI elements—the boxes, the borders, the size of everything—are just way too chunky to accomplish what the current SC2 UI does: it has a fine balance where the commonly used buttons are extremely clear but everything text-heavy feels pretty lean. I get that they're going for that glorious animated chunkiness of the original WC3 client, which is highly satisfying to use to this day from an art/audio standpoint, but everything looks so crowded. Mind you, it looks like Wowhead's shots were taken at 1024x768, so maybe everything will look roomier at scale.
Man lots of people doing their absolute best to tell people off for boycotting something thats for a good purpose. We get it. You want the game.
On topic: I kinda like the new one more. But they should have done a 1 to 1 like they did with StarCraft Remastered.
I'm actually shocked so few people in this thread are boycotting. Disheartening
Let me offer another perspective as someone who has been extremely wrapped up in the Blizzard/China situation this week, practically to obsession, and who greatly appreciates your support. I've never been this involved or vocal about a games-and-politics issue in my life, and I usually stay far, far away from outrages big and small, justified or petty, when they show up on this board. Most of them, even the most notorious ones up to this point, felt low-stakes or overblown, or they involved publishers/developers with whom I never had any involvement anyway, so I thought I'd leave the activism to people who really had the energy and inclination to care.
Having seen this from both sides now: when you're really involved in pushing on a major issue like this, follow every development as it comes in, and voice your discontent to apply what pressure you can—it really does feel like the only story in the industry that matters, the thing that everything else revolves around. (And to be clear, I still believe this to be the case here.) But it's easy to lose sight of how you might be in a bubble, and how others out there might just see it from the outside as no more than one or two fast-moving threads. And when you peer outside of the bubble, it's tempting to be disheartened by the apparent apathy.
I think that's a bit of a trap, and that it's typically counterproductive to shame others who, for whatever reason, choose not to be open activists. The activism can afford to be the dominant conversation without also being a suffocating one.
So as important as this is to me, I'm not going to accuse anyone of shirking a moral duty. It's extremely difficult to ever believe that an individual contribution to a mass action like a boycott ever accomplishes everything other than assuaging your own conscience, until such time as the action actually gets results. I don't mind if others discuss the game unimpeded, and think they should; I just know that I'll be tempering my own complicity in promoting it, and supporting those who refund or pass on it. I won't be talking about Reforged without a massive asterisk on it until such time as Blizzard makes this right. Let's do what we can without our own means, within our own political will.
And from what I'm seeing elsewhere in places that are more popular hangouts for the Blizzard base (Era isn't one, I can tell you that for sure), for once the disgruntlement with Blizzard's actions and messaging really does seem to be the mainstream sentiment among those most involved with their product line, rather than the cry of a vocal minority that can't apply enough pressure to get anything done. I'm encouraged by that, and it's fine if we don't see the same anger and frustration from every voice in every corner.
Outrage, however justified and righteous it may be, is exhausting. And exhaustion is how you lose.
Do you think it makes for a good forum culture if everyone accused everyone else because of the games they like, or companies they buy from? And I am fairly sure that almost everyone here would be guilty of playing games from a company that has done something another user deems unethical at some point.
Pointing out that a company has done something in a thread makes sense. Attacking other users over it, not so much. And if you are yourself playing games from a company that has done or supported something bad, it is pretty hypocritical I'd say. In this thread alone, you can find some users who are talking about boycotting Blizzard (which again, they have every right to), and when you look a few posts down their history on ERA, you will see that their high moral standards only seem to apply very selectively.
As someone openly selective, I agree. We all have to pick our battles, and shouldn't pretend that everybody has the energy, attention, and sense of obligation to rally over everything. Many others standing next to me on the Hong Kong issue would not be pleased to know that I never stood with them over THQ or the controversial YouTuber of the week. Embrace the support when it's there; don't shame others around you when it's not.
