Just for the record, I in no way think this is good for the gamer, Verno; I just don't see it as a huge deal. And I think Bob Kotick is the industry's biggest jackass by a mile.

I am a private person, but I've never been a fan of anonymity on the internet. I think we tend to act more genuine when we have a name attached to our posts. Which is why I would never say anything to someone on the net I wouldn't tell them to their face. It's too easy to condition yourself to be a douche otherwise.

I realize this has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand - just thinking out loud.

Mr. Tact wrote on Jul 8, 2010, 11:48:
The big thing for me here is, I just don't get it. I don't understand what Blizzard (Activision, whoever) thinks the pros are to this approach. Do they really think a social networking tie-in is a money maker or that their customers are clamoring for it? There just seems to be a total disconnect from reality. What is the actual motivation that set these actions in motion? Why didn't someone stand up and say, "Uh, I think this might not be a good idea and here's why." Very weird.

They signed a large deal with Facebook, they are going after the Farmville type people basically. It's just money as usual and theres nothing wrong with the pursuit of money but this is going waaaaay too far.

Kevlar wrote on Jul 8, 2010, 11:13:

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 8, 2010, 10:42:

Jack wrote on Jul 8, 2010, 10:28:
I support Blizzard. Too bad if people can't escape the real world anymore with their internet asshatery.

I'm buying Starcraft 2.

I'm stunned by your shortsightedness.

Seconded. I'm not a WoW player, but here's why I'm concerned with such an act/precedent as RealID:

http://i.imgur.com/RG8Wl.png

Holy shit the fact that that guy has no idea how fucking scary he is makes it so damn scary! Chills almost went down my spine reading that. Beats watching horror movies..

Mr. Tact wrote on Jul 8, 2010, 11:48:
The big thing for me here is, I just don't get it. I don't understand what Blizzard (Activision, whoever) thinks the pros are to this approach. Do they really think a social networking tie-in is a money maker or that their customers are clamoring for it? There just seems to be a total disconnect from reality. What is the actual motivation that set these actions in motion? Why didn't someone stand up and say, "Uh, I think this might not be a good idea and here's why." Very weird.

That's what I've been trying to say here aswell. I just.. don't get it. There must be a bigger picture beyond the "social networking" crap and it 'scares' me.

The big thing for me here is, I just don't get it. I don't understand what Blizzard (Activision, whoever) thinks the pros are to this approach. Do they really think a social networking tie-in is a money maker or that their customers are clamoring for it? There just seems to be a total disconnect from reality. What is the actual motivation that set these actions in motion? Why didn't someone stand up and say, "Uh, I think this might not be a good idea and here's why." Very weird.

Makes me glad I quit WOW.

I absolutely abhor Facebook due to their laughable policies on "privacy" and will never use it. Blizzard can go eff themselves for trying to force me to use real world identification on the Internet to play a goddamn GAME due to their greed to milk more cash from Facebook integration.

Cancelled SC 2 and Diablo 3 pre-orders too. Never buying another CoD game again due to them giving the franchise consolitis and the Guitar Hero treatment, and screwing over IW.

Good job CEO Bobby Kotick all around. I sure hope you win a lot of people over like you did me, then maybe they can get someone at the helm that isn't a greedy beancounter that actually wants Activision to make games first and foremost again and not be a sorry joke.

On the creep-o-meter scale thats just the tip of the iceberg too.

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 8, 2010, 10:42:

Jack wrote on Jul 8, 2010, 10:28:
I support Blizzard. Too bad if people can't escape the real world anymore with their internet asshatery.

I'm buying Starcraft 2.

I'm stunned by your shortsightedness.

Seconded. I'm not a WoW player, but here's why I'm concerned with such an act/precedent as RealID:

http://i.imgur.com/RG8Wl.png

Jack wrote on Jul 8, 2010, 10:28:
I support Blizzard. Too bad if people can't escape the real world anymore with their internet asshatery.

I'm buying Starcraft 2.

I'm stunned by your shortsightedness.

Jack wrote on Jul 8, 2010, 10:28:
I support Blizzard. Too bad if people can't escape the real world anymore with their internet asshatery.

I'm buying Starcraft 2.

It has nothing to do with escaping anything. Do you think female gamers want their info exposed? Do you think people want their potential employers finding out they spend 4 hours raiding every night? Do you think people with security clearances want to be excluded from playing these games at all? There's a huge list on the forums of all the people this potentially affects and guess what? No one can find a single positive effect this would have.

Also posting a troll while commenting on others "asshatery" is amusing. Are you really thick enough to believe this has anything to do with the forums? It's about money changing hands between them and Facebook.

I support Blizzard. Too bad if people can't escape the real world anymore with their internet asshatery.

I'm buying Starcraft 2.

Agent.X7 wrote on Jul 8, 2010, 01:29:
Yes, because of the thousands of John Smiths on the planet, you will know exactly which one to look up.

You'll be happy to know my name is unique. There are 3 of me in all of Canada. In the US there are 6, with the same name. I'll just point out that uncommon names are the more common variety when you're trying to track someone down.

Agent.X7 wrote on Jul 7, 2010, 23:40:
If privacy was such a big fucking deal, then we'd all be doing something about the government in our respective countries (most of us, anyway) and we're not. It all boils down to people being ignorant, or people not wanting to take responsibility for their bullshit online.

In Canada we did. See in this mythical land of Canada, we have the charter of rights and freedoms. Part of that charter says you have a reasonable right to privacy. The privacy act further goes on, ontop of this to protect the citizens from not only the government prying into their lives; but businesses big and small from doing it(unless there's a reasonable reason they might have an issue). That issue might be something stupid like a mom & pop computer store that only has a few hundred customers. There is some leeway given.

Anyway, when you get down to it, most of the US has no idea what actual privacy laws are. Or why you should have a reasonable expectation of privacy. On the otherhand, most of Europe has figured it out. Which is why people like yourself, who have no idea why disclosing your name publicly is a bad idea. Especially on the intarwebs.

Verno wrote on Jul 8, 2010, 09:42:

I think Blizzard should focus on making videogames and not making social networks, that is what people buy their products for. I sure as hell will not buy Starcraft 2 when I have to worry at any point about whether or not a simple act like posting on a forum or adding someone to my friends list might expose my information to the world. I highly recommend others do the same.

It's sophisticated comments like these that keep me coming back to online forums. Couldn't agree more with what you just said.

Like I said earlier, I can't understand how this Real ID could've ever gone past a privacy disclaimer thing. I'd think Blizzard can be sued on a couple of things by executing this Real ID thing. But then, I don't really know that much about rights so I guess they're safe although I'm baffled.

Also, how could they've ever decided to make this decision? A cheap-ass survey would give results saying that one of the big reasons people adore the internet and (multiplayer) gaming is because of their anonymity. Although this anonymity leads to deindividuation -- which is a big reason the criminal act of piracy is done by right about everyone! -- it's not at all a tactical move of Blizzard to make an attempt to take that anonymity away. It's not what the customers want.

and our goal is to create a social gaming service that players want to use

Really? So far your actions seem to be dictating the exact opposite.

Creston

InBlack wrote on Jul 8, 2010, 09:56:

But, I can see how many people see this as an intrusion of privacy and I agree that unless you can choose an alias instead of a real name it isnt a step in the right direction.

Dude, the whole point is that you cannot choose an alias. Why else do you think people are so worked up?

Here to save some time:

- you cannot choose an alias, whatever first and last name you chose when you setup your account are used
- you cannot change this information without telephoning Blizzard who usually require photo ID and such to process name changes on accounts
- If you have any realid friends at all, that information is shared automatically between friends. This is also known as "Friends of Friends" functionality.
- Blizzard claimed this was due to wanting to clean up their forums but their PR department unfortunately didn't get the memo and released information about a big Facebook deal they just signed.
- You cannot post on the battle.net forums without also posting under your RealID. This makes no sense, they could have just limited people to posting under one character on the forums. This includes non-discussion forums like feedback, tech support and etc.

These limitations are probably just the beginning too. It goes this far now, who knows how far tomorrow?

If you can use an alias then what's the point of this to begin with?

Edit: I guess there's some contention on whether or not you can use one...I'm just going off "(though they admit that any name can be registered, though it will be associated with your unique CD key)"

This comment was edited on Jul 8, 2010, 10:09.

I dont have a problem with internet privacy, worrying about a lunatic hunting me down through the web is about as likely as being struck by lightning. I use facebook and I find it useful for a lot of different things, but I dont randomly add unknown people to my friends list. As far as I can see Blizzard is trying to emulate Valve with this RealID "friends" thing and I dont really see that as a bad thing as long as you get to choose an alias and add friends in a sensible manner...

But, I can see how many people see this as an intrusion of privacy and I agree that unless you can choose an alias instead of a real name it isnt a step in the right direction.

I'am totally in agreement that they should focus on making games not building a social network. The craze to add Social network integration in to everything is getting out of hand.

TheEmissary wrote on Jul 8, 2010, 09:36:

We like to think we have privacy or atleast a reasonable expectation of privacy, but in reality everytime we go in a public space real or virtual we are often photographed/logged/etc and often we leave unintentional bits of information that can be tracked back to our unique presence. I think we should at least strive for controlling the information about our selves.

Exactly and this system offers no control over the information you want to share or not. It attempts to force a binary choice on the consumer because Bobby Kotick signed a Facebook deal on Blizzards behalf.

It doesn't take much at all to resolve someones Identity which is scary or creepy to those who were under the assumption they had privacy. In your car example your privacy is only protected as long as someone doesn't take the time to resolve your license plate number or other vehicle information.

The car example wasn't mine, it was flawed and I was simply pointing out why. Taking the time to resolve your personal information based on a plate number alone isn't as simple as you make it to be either, surely not as simple as having your information printed in bold for the world to see.

I think blizzard should definitely make an effort to add some level of protection to the at risk groups based on Age/ethnicity/orientation. Not to mention they should have taken baby steps with the new system instead of all or nothing deal.

I think Blizzard should focus on making videogames and not making social networks, that is what people buy their products for. I sure as hell will not buy Starcraft 2 when I have to worry at any point about whether or not a simple act like posting on a forum or adding someone to my friends list might expose my information to the world. I highly recommend others do the same.

Verno wrote on Jul 8, 2010, 09:21:
Your first and last name aren't written on the back of your car, allowing that crazy guy to look up your address and hunt you down though. No offense Prez but poor analogy(are car analogies ever good?). People who don't care about their privacy don't care about this, that's no shock but surely you see can see the implications it has for people that do I would hope.

And again this has no beneficial properties whatsoever for the customer. It's serving Bobby Koticks attempts to milk the Facebook crowd, nothing more. Bobby has enough money guys, he doesn't need your support.

We like to think we have privacy or atleast a reasonable expectation of privacy, but in reality everytime we go in a public space real or virtual we are often photographed/logged/etc and often we leave unintentional bits of information that can be tracked back to our unique presence. I think we should at least strive for controlling the information about our selves.

It doesn't take much at all to resolve someones Identity which is scary or creepy to those who were under the assumption they had privacy. In your car example your privacy is only protected as long as someone doesn't take the time to resolve your license plate number or other vehicle information.

I think blizzard should definitely make an effort to add some level of protection to the at risk groups based on Age/ethnicity/orientation. Not to mention they should have taken baby steps with the new system instead of all or nothing deal.