After some thought I think that the decision to ban the map may seem harsh but it isn't entirely unreasonable. It's important that people realize that there are some restrictions that need to be imposed on maps that are intended to be shared across the network. Free speech arguments don't really apply since this is a private service.
It may seem unfair, but Blizzard has to make this point known clearly from the start, and banning high profile maps that violate these policies is an important part of the process. Such will save a lot of hassle for them in the future, which means they'll have more time to work on more important things for us.
It's reasonable of Blizzard to offer methods to lift map bans. While we might expect them to offer a map maker a more detailed analysis of why a map was banned and a built in adjustment period, again this will take more work on their part. Some maps are just to large to provide detailed reports on. I'm afraid in this case the onus is on the map maker to make the proper adjustments.
I'm sure if OP provides a reasonable account to the online service forum request a lift, as well as adjusting the map accordingly Blizzard will gladly lift the ban. It's not like they don't want good maps.
You don't seem to understand, if he is going to use that resource, it's still his responsibility. If the dictionary contains words that blizzard is going to ban and he can't police it well enough, then he simply can't use it.
What you're saying, basically, is that he either has to do a ridiculous amount of work (and somewhat impossible work, since many words have offensive and non-offensive connotations), or he just can't make this type of map. Having him manually type up his own list of words would also either take ages (remember he has to look up the meaning of every word he includes since English isn't his first language), or would lead to boring play since the database of words would be small , and the same words would crop up again and again.
The very fact that Blizzard is banning words entirely divorced from context is silly. They're banning a dictionary: a book I actively paged through for fun when I was seven...and I wasn't emotionally scarred when I came across "dirty" words (and reading a dictionary is even worse, since they provide meanings too!)
Blizzard has pretty much always banned questionable words, I even had to rename a WoW character because in other regions it was a common word for drugs that I hadn't heard.
I think Bliz went pretty overboard in policing char names too, but at least changing your name is easy to do (as opposed to policing a 32,000 word database), and Bliz doesn't penalize you by, say, removing a portion of your char's gold, which is analogous to the stripping of popularity caused by banning NWW, assuming he ever gets it approved again.
The fact that they ban these words is not going to change, so don't bother trying, they have their reasons. If you don't like it, then go make your own game using other software. As it is the tools we get to use for the $80 the game cost is pretty amazing.
Ah, the old, "if you don't like it, don't let the door hit you on the way out" line. Sorry, no. If enough people complain, Blizzard absolutely will change policy. I doubt they will flat out stop banning maps, but if this sort of conflict gets them to stop and think, and rework some of their policies to be less draconian and more considerate of honest mistakes, than it's a discussion worth having. For example, instituting a "mature map" filter whereby Blizzard flags objectionable maps (not completely obscene ones like hentai maps, which would still be banned) as "mature," allowing the map to still exist on Bnet for those who don't feel the need to shield their Teenagers (rated T for teen, remember?) from the world, and allowing the mapper to fix this status if he or she so chooses.
Also, I agree the tools we get for our money are great. I'm not dissing the tools (well, maybe the data editor a teeny bit), just Blizzard's conduct.
The best way to handle this particular situation would probably be create a filter for your map, and put in as many bad words as you so that they don't get used. You could ask blizzard for a list of words, they probably wont give it to you which is a shame because it would make for easy filtering - perhaps if enough people requested it they might.
Bliz could institute a mature language filter for any text displayed on screen, not just chat text. It would make the map pretty hard for people with that filter on, but that's their choice :)
UntitledQ cleaned today 150 bad words from the dictionary. As he said, "I really don't know how to find any more, I searched the definitions for various adjectives and checked out a few lists online; and I've definitely wasted enough time on this. If they find something now we can just remove that, though it'd of course be easier if they sent us a list."
As soon as Blizzard contacts me, I plan to send a copy of the new dictionary to them.
Is it possible to just ask them for a list of words they don't want? It would be a lot faster to do a Find for each word, and if it's found, remove it. Plus it would give the rest of us a clear line as opposed to a vague "don't be vulgar," which means different things to different people.
Heck, even if you can't search the database directly, you could write a trigger inside the map to find all those words for you and then print them out to the screen for manual removal.
Bliz could release the list of words filtered in its mature language filter, or even add a "filter mature words" option in the triggers / effects that display text.
Is it possible to just ask them for a list of words they don't want? It would be a lot faster to do a Find for each word, and if it's found, remove it. Plus it would give the rest of us a clear line as opposed to a vague "don't be vulgar," which means different things to different people.
Heck, even if you can't search the database directly, you could write a trigger inside the map to find all those words for you and then print them out to the screen for manual removal.
Umm if they give us a list of words we cant use, I bet at least 30% of the people on mapster here could write a seperate program to remove the offending entries from what ever "database" Rogerio is using.
I'd be willing to write such a program for anybody that needs it if blizzard does give us a list of offending words.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Skype
KageNinpo = SN
My Libraries
DialogLeaderboard & TeamSort
My Projects
SPACEWAR Tribute
Infinite TD
They probably won't release list of offending words because they would be... offending. Anyway they don't prolly have list like that, and imagine somebody from blizz sitting in an office trying to come up with offensive wording to put on a list for everyone to view? They use (or at least should) common sense while checking maps for wording.
What you're saying, basically, is that he either has to do a ridiculous amount of work (and somewhat impossible work, since many words have offensive and non-offensive connotations), or he just can't make this type of map. Having him manually type up his own list of words would also either take ages (remember he has to look up the meaning of every word he includes since English isn't his first language), or would lead to boring play since the database of words would be small , and the same words would crop up again and again.
Yes, he chose to make this type of game that involves words. Besides it really wouldn't be that difficult to come up with a list of safe words to use in his game, I'm sure he could get away with much less than 32,000 words and just keep adding to them.
@KratsAU: Go
The very fact that Blizzard is banning words entirely divorced from context is silly. They're banning a dictionary: a book I actively paged through for fun when I was seven...and I wasn't emotionally scarred when I came across "dirty" words (and reading a dictionary is even worse, since they provide meanings too!)
Silly to you maybe, but not everyone is like you. I'm personally not effected by these words, but I know that others are for whatever reason. The other side of it is, you don't need to use dirty/childish words to make a game or make it fun. Some people might get a kick out of it, but it won't sustain your game.
Anyhow, lets just agree to disagree. I do understand your feelings on the subject, but I also understand blizzards position as well. The more you get into developing games, the more you start to appreciate developers positions imo. Years ago I probably would have agreed with you outright.
Yes, he chose to make this type of game that involves words. Besides it really wouldn't be that difficult to come up with a list of safe words to use in his game, I'm sure he could get away with much less than 32,000 words and just keep adding to them.
He could "get away" with a much smaller list, but the map would be lesser for it. It's no fun when words repeat frequently; I've seen words repeat already in NWW, so I don't want to see how often they would repeat with a much smaller database.
Silly to you maybe, but not everyone is like you. I'm personally not effected by these words, but I know that others are for whatever reason.
Sure, everyone isn't like me, but I'm also not the only person to hold this belief. See the official SC2 forum post for significant evidence of this. Also, it's not enough that someone cry "I'm offended!" if the reason for that offense is wholly illogical. I'm offended when maps are ugly: should I report all ugly maps? "Whatever reason" is a vague and arbitrary standard to govern banning maps from Bnet.
The other side of it is, you don't need to use dirty/childish words to make a game or make it fun. Some people might get a kick out of it, but it won't sustain your game.
This isn't a case where the mapmaker decided to be childish to give some people a "kick". This is an instance where some potentially offensive words, which exist in most dictionaries, were included unintentionally. And removing said words is no small feat, especially since many of the words, including the word that Blizzard used as an example ("dyke"), have legitimate meanings.
Anyhow, lets just agree to disagree. I do understand your feelings on the subject, but I also understand blizzards position as well. The more you get into developing games, the more you start to appreciate developers positions imo. Years ago I probably would have agreed with you outright.
Fair enough. It's not that I don't understand Blizzard's position, I just think that it's shortsighted. Cracking down hard on some of the community's best mappers for unintentional mistakes is a horrible way to foster growth of the mapping community. I, and all of my friends that play SC2, have long since finished the campaign. It was great, but the standard multiplayer doesn't exactly thrill us. Custom maps are what keeps us playing. Blizzard knows this, but seems to have a funny way of showing it lately.
As is often the case the legitimate people are going to be effected by the rules that are there to protect against the few who abuse the system, it's just the unfortunately truth.
Like I said before, it really comes down to how blizzard handles these legitimate cases and how hard it is for the OP to get his map back online. If it's only down for a week then I think it's "good enough", if it takes months of back/forward then I think we have a problem.
I somehow get the feeling that it's not gonna happen... Blizzard isn't one to keep tabs on individuals, and especially not those who aren't in their "support" thread.
Knowing how corporations can be, the one replying to your emails is different to the one who's reading them.
As words (and email) is passed from person to person in their chain of command, the emphasis and meaning gets lost and by the time it reaches a important person, it means little or nothing to them, and thus they throw it in the trash and sends a order to "reply with this excuse" thing.
Activision-Blizzard, Nexon America, and EA games are my list of people you can't complain to unless you've got a lawyer backing you up or something.
As is often the case the legitimate people are going to be effected by the rules that are there to protect against the few who abuse the system, it's just the unfortunately truth.
Like I said before, it really comes down to how blizzard handles these legitimate cases and how hard it is for the OP to get his map back online. If it's only down for a week then I think it's "good enough", if it takes months of back/forward then I think we have a problem.
The requirement that all custom user content be submitted to and hosted through Blizzard is already a problem with the system, as this incident illustrates. Consider this for a moment: the game client offers an option to enable or disable a mature language filter. What stops Blizzard from setting a flag on custom user content that requires this filter be disabled for all users playing or viewing that content in game? Sure, it doesn't solve the innate problem that mappers and modders have to deal with the ridiculous "Battle.net 2.0" features, but surely it still solves the legal problem of hosting user content with undesired words, no?
Sure, it doesn't solve the innate problem that mappers and modders have to deal with the ridiculous "Battle.net 2.0" features, but surely it still solves the legal problem of hosting user content with undesired words, no?
That's not a bad idea, but I'm really not sure if that does solve legal problems with game rating stuff. Keep in mind they have to deal with laws from different countries as well, some which are pretty strict. Although it seems like a simple fix, they would need to put time/money/effort even if it would only take them a few hours to implement the feature.
I honestly don't think they just do this to spite everyone, and I'm sure alot of it has to do with covering their ass, as well as keeping it a friendly atmosphere.
I'm in Australia, and we don't even have a R18 rating for games here. This means if a game doesn't fit into one of the other ratings, it get's banned. Stupid I know, but each country is stupid in their own different way - making it difficult for developers.
That's not a bad idea, but I'm really not sure if that does solve legal problems with game rating stuff. Keep in mind they have to deal with laws from different countries as well, some which are pretty strict. Although it seems like a simple fix, they would need to put time/money/effort even if it would only take them a few hours to implement the feature.
I honestly don't think they just do this to spite everyone, and I'm sure alot of it has to do with covering their ass, as well as keeping it a friendly atmosphere.
I'm in Australia, and we don't even have a R18 rating for games here. This means if a game doesn't fit into one of the other ratings, it get's banned. Stupid I know, but each country is stupid in their own different way - making it difficult for developers.
I do agree that my proposed solution is too weak, since the language filter setting can be changed by anyone at any time, but I believe that the "flavor" of the idea could be carried through in an acceptable manner, at least for most countries. Yes, it would cost Blizzard a relatively small amount in the near term to implement any change, but improving the custom map systems would make SC2 a more viable game in the long term, assuming Blizzard cares about future sales.
Legally, it's easier still if Blizzard just allows local hosting of maps, as in SC and WC3, because they don't have to be liable for any user content at all. Since Blizzard is clearly fairly adamant about requiring Battle.net hosting of maps (undoubtedly for the future map marketplace), they should at least try to accommodate mappers and modders, and the current level of support is rather lacking. The requirements for maps to pass the filters are generally unspecified, banned maps cannot easily be modified and re-uploaded, map authors cannot easily distribute maps cross-region, maps have very strict file size limits that restrict custom assets, and so on.
Of course, I have little hope for any near-term improvements to the custom game and custom map systems in SC2 right now, so I do hope that Rodrigo can make his map acceptable to Blizzard through the existing channels; Nexus Word Wars was a fairly fun map while it was available.
Well it's really not going to effect that many maps, NWW is an obvious exception because it has a focus on words.
But yeah they still have some work to do, but let's face it, it hasn't really been out that long and blizzard has a good track record (look at WC3) with this sort of thing, so I really think it still has a strong future. These things just take time.
After some thought I think that the decision to ban the map may seem harsh but it isn't entirely unreasonable. It's important that people realize that there are some restrictions that need to be imposed on maps that are intended to be shared across the network. Free speech arguments don't really apply since this is a private service.
It may seem unfair, but Blizzard has to make this point known clearly from the start, and banning high profile maps that violate these policies is an important part of the process. Such will save a lot of hassle for them in the future, which means they'll have more time to work on more important things for us.
It's reasonable of Blizzard to offer methods to lift map bans. While we might expect them to offer a map maker a more detailed analysis of why a map was banned and a built in adjustment period, again this will take more work on their part. Some maps are just to large to provide detailed reports on. I'm afraid in this case the onus is on the map maker to make the proper adjustments.
I'm sure if OP provides a reasonable account to the online service forum request a lift, as well as adjusting the map accordingly Blizzard will gladly lift the ban. It's not like they don't want good maps.
What you're saying, basically, is that he either has to do a ridiculous amount of work (and somewhat impossible work, since many words have offensive and non-offensive connotations), or he just can't make this type of map. Having him manually type up his own list of words would also either take ages (remember he has to look up the meaning of every word he includes since English isn't his first language), or would lead to boring play since the database of words would be small , and the same words would crop up again and again.
The very fact that Blizzard is banning words entirely divorced from context is silly. They're banning a dictionary: a book I actively paged through for fun when I was seven...and I wasn't emotionally scarred when I came across "dirty" words (and reading a dictionary is even worse, since they provide meanings too!)
I think Bliz went pretty overboard in policing char names too, but at least changing your name is easy to do (as opposed to policing a 32,000 word database), and Bliz doesn't penalize you by, say, removing a portion of your char's gold, which is analogous to the stripping of popularity caused by banning NWW, assuming he ever gets it approved again.
Ah, the old, "if you don't like it, don't let the door hit you on the way out" line. Sorry, no. If enough people complain, Blizzard absolutely will change policy. I doubt they will flat out stop banning maps, but if this sort of conflict gets them to stop and think, and rework some of their policies to be less draconian and more considerate of honest mistakes, than it's a discussion worth having. For example, instituting a "mature map" filter whereby Blizzard flags objectionable maps (not completely obscene ones like hentai maps, which would still be banned) as "mature," allowing the map to still exist on Bnet for those who don't feel the need to shield their Teenagers (rated T for teen, remember?) from the world, and allowing the mapper to fix this status if he or she so chooses.
Also, I agree the tools we get for our money are great. I'm not dissing the tools (well, maybe the data editor a teeny bit), just Blizzard's conduct.
Bliz could institute a mature language filter for any text displayed on screen, not just chat text. It would make the map pretty hard for people with that filter on, but that's their choice :)
UntitledQ cleaned today 150 bad words from the dictionary. As he said, "I really don't know how to find any more, I searched the definitions for various adjectives and checked out a few lists online; and I've definitely wasted enough time on this. If they find something now we can just remove that, though it'd of course be easier if they sent us a list."
As soon as Blizzard contacts me, I plan to send a copy of the new dictionary to them.
@RodrigoAlves: Go
Thanks for your work (and UntitledQ's); I hope to play this map again soon.
Is it possible to just ask them for a list of words they don't want? It would be a lot faster to do a Find for each word, and if it's found, remove it. Plus it would give the rest of us a clear line as opposed to a vague "don't be vulgar," which means different things to different people.
Heck, even if you can't search the database directly, you could write a trigger inside the map to find all those words for you and then print them out to the screen for manual removal.
@EnderAtreides: Go
Bliz could release the list of words filtered in its mature language filter, or even add a "filter mature words" option in the triggers / effects that display text.
Umm if they give us a list of words we cant use, I bet at least 30% of the people on mapster here could write a seperate program to remove the offending entries from what ever "database" Rogerio is using.
I'd be willing to write such a program for anybody that needs it if blizzard does give us a list of offending words.
They probably won't release list of offending words because they would be... offending. Anyway they don't prolly have list like that, and imagine somebody from blizz sitting in an office trying to come up with offensive wording to put on a list for everyone to view? They use (or at least should) common sense while checking maps for wording.
Yes, he chose to make this type of game that involves words. Besides it really wouldn't be that difficult to come up with a list of safe words to use in his game, I'm sure he could get away with much less than 32,000 words and just keep adding to them.
Silly to you maybe, but not everyone is like you. I'm personally not effected by these words, but I know that others are for whatever reason. The other side of it is, you don't need to use dirty/childish words to make a game or make it fun. Some people might get a kick out of it, but it won't sustain your game.
Anyhow, lets just agree to disagree. I do understand your feelings on the subject, but I also understand blizzards position as well. The more you get into developing games, the more you start to appreciate developers positions imo. Years ago I probably would have agreed with you outright.
He could "get away" with a much smaller list, but the map would be lesser for it. It's no fun when words repeat frequently; I've seen words repeat already in NWW, so I don't want to see how often they would repeat with a much smaller database.
Sure, everyone isn't like me, but I'm also not the only person to hold this belief. See the official SC2 forum post for significant evidence of this. Also, it's not enough that someone cry "I'm offended!" if the reason for that offense is wholly illogical. I'm offended when maps are ugly: should I report all ugly maps? "Whatever reason" is a vague and arbitrary standard to govern banning maps from Bnet.
This isn't a case where the mapmaker decided to be childish to give some people a "kick". This is an instance where some potentially offensive words, which exist in most dictionaries, were included unintentionally. And removing said words is no small feat, especially since many of the words, including the word that Blizzard used as an example ("dyke"), have legitimate meanings.
Fair enough. It's not that I don't understand Blizzard's position, I just think that it's shortsighted. Cracking down hard on some of the community's best mappers for unintentional mistakes is a horrible way to foster growth of the mapping community. I, and all of my friends that play SC2, have long since finished the campaign. It was great, but the standard multiplayer doesn't exactly thrill us. Custom maps are what keeps us playing. Blizzard knows this, but seems to have a funny way of showing it lately.
@ElJiggles: Go
As is often the case the legitimate people are going to be effected by the rules that are there to protect against the few who abuse the system, it's just the unfortunately truth.
Like I said before, it really comes down to how blizzard handles these legitimate cases and how hard it is for the OP to get his map back online. If it's only down for a week then I think it's "good enough", if it takes months of back/forward then I think we have a problem.
I somehow get the feeling that it's not gonna happen... Blizzard isn't one to keep tabs on individuals, and especially not those who aren't in their "support" thread.
Knowing how corporations can be, the one replying to your emails is different to the one who's reading them. As words (and email) is passed from person to person in their chain of command, the emphasis and meaning gets lost and by the time it reaches a important person, it means little or nothing to them, and thus they throw it in the trash and sends a order to "reply with this excuse" thing.
Activision-Blizzard, Nexon America, and EA games are my list of people you can't complain to unless you've got a lawyer backing you up or something.
The requirement that all custom user content be submitted to and hosted through Blizzard is already a problem with the system, as this incident illustrates. Consider this for a moment: the game client offers an option to enable or disable a mature language filter. What stops Blizzard from setting a flag on custom user content that requires this filter be disabled for all users playing or viewing that content in game? Sure, it doesn't solve the innate problem that mappers and modders have to deal with the ridiculous "Battle.net 2.0" features, but surely it still solves the legal problem of hosting user content with undesired words, no?
That's not a bad idea, but I'm really not sure if that does solve legal problems with game rating stuff. Keep in mind they have to deal with laws from different countries as well, some which are pretty strict. Although it seems like a simple fix, they would need to put time/money/effort even if it would only take them a few hours to implement the feature.
I honestly don't think they just do this to spite everyone, and I'm sure alot of it has to do with covering their ass, as well as keeping it a friendly atmosphere.
I'm in Australia, and we don't even have a R18 rating for games here. This means if a game doesn't fit into one of the other ratings, it get's banned. Stupid I know, but each country is stupid in their own different way - making it difficult for developers.
I do agree that my proposed solution is too weak, since the language filter setting can be changed by anyone at any time, but I believe that the "flavor" of the idea could be carried through in an acceptable manner, at least for most countries. Yes, it would cost Blizzard a relatively small amount in the near term to implement any change, but improving the custom map systems would make SC2 a more viable game in the long term, assuming Blizzard cares about future sales.
Legally, it's easier still if Blizzard just allows local hosting of maps, as in SC and WC3, because they don't have to be liable for any user content at all. Since Blizzard is clearly fairly adamant about requiring Battle.net hosting of maps (undoubtedly for the future map marketplace), they should at least try to accommodate mappers and modders, and the current level of support is rather lacking. The requirements for maps to pass the filters are generally unspecified, banned maps cannot easily be modified and re-uploaded, map authors cannot easily distribute maps cross-region, maps have very strict file size limits that restrict custom assets, and so on.
Of course, I have little hope for any near-term improvements to the custom game and custom map systems in SC2 right now, so I do hope that Rodrigo can make his map acceptable to Blizzard through the existing channels; Nexus Word Wars was a fairly fun map while it was available.
Well it's really not going to effect that many maps, NWW is an obvious exception because it has a focus on words.
But yeah they still have some work to do, but let's face it, it hasn't really been out that long and blizzard has a good track record (look at WC3) with this sort of thing, so I really think it still has a strong future. These things just take time.
So many days without NWW makes me so sad... :(
The new NWW version (with new words and units) is already done and tested. However, Blizzard haven't contacted me yet. :(
@RodrigoAlves: Go
Named it NWW (Censored version) or "non-explicit version". Then publish it.
Have they given you publishing rights back yet?