StarCraft II, Diablo III Getting Pseudo-LAN

[ksenter]

I'm fine with this change. As long as it doesn't tie up my internet connection when me and all my room mates play each other, I'm ok with it. I was afraid for a while there that no LAN would be enough to keep me from buying it. But as long as this works as advertised it's ok. It would be better if it would work even when the internet craps out, and even better than that if you could just buy one copy and install multiple "network play only" copies on multiple PC's like you could with the old StarCraft, but its still better than I was afraid it was going to be.

 

[Guest]

You have one sentence to resume what Blizzard is forced to do about piracy : Blizzard is now held by Vivendi. So don't be surprised they don't respect you PC gamers. At least, they're still doing the game for PC, not a console game with a crappy PC port.

Blizzard is now like an employee forced to do what it's boss tell him to not get fired. Vivendi is the real evil, just want to make the game market the way they want, but like music market, missing the real concern : CONSUMERS/GAMERS.

 

[n3ard3ath]

This seems to be the same approach the Neverwinter Nights games are taking in regard to LAN. You got to authentic to actualy open up the multiplayer menu, then you got your LAN. I'm not sure you have to authentic each time though, I don't remember. It would be preferable if not. In my opinion it's already way better than no LAN at all, authetication only takes a few seconds and a few bits of bandwith, no real problem there, while still preventing pirates to play online over hamachi. So that seems to be good news overall.

In the end there will probably be a crack bypassing the authetication in the executable, but that will take some time to pull off, and will make it harder and more annoying to be able to play online with a pirated copy.

I don't like the direction Diablo 3 is taking, visually speaking, and I never really been a fan of Starcraft, so I don't really give a damn either ways, LAN or not. I just know the direction they are now taking will help them regain some respect from their fans.

 

[ezareth]

So many ignorants here, and all the pirates are thumbing down anyone who doesn't agree with them. I thumbed up all the dissenting comments.

I had concerns on the LAN issue because I LAN at my office all the time mainly to play in a 0 latency environment. Blizzard has now corrected the issue. This Authentication method is what ALL PC game developers are moving to. Every game I've purchased this year (6 so far) has needed to be activated online, and most of them that are multiplayer need to be played with an online account via something similar to battle.net whether it is steam, or impulse, or another of the many online networks developed to prevent piracy.

I don't know if all of you complainers noticed but the PC game market share has been noticably shrinking. Boycotting or threatening to Boycott the largest remaining PC game developer is doing nothing to help your cause and everything to ensure our future in gaming will be on a console, or using ported sub-par console games on our PC. Maybe you failed to notice that John Carmack and ID software has abandonded ship for the console as well as several other major developers.

Blizzard's form of DRM is perfectly acceptable to the vast majority of players who actually plan to BUY the game and much preferable to any other form of DRM used by other companies in the past. I agree that if you have a problem with this, it is most likely because you don't feel like paying for the game like the rest of us.

 

[Guest]

Ezareth, you are a moron. I love it how you think that everybody who wants LAN capability is a pirate. Let me clear this straight up for you. I haven't played an illegal copy of a computer game in over 10 years and I have NEVER pirated a Blizzard game. I never found it worth my time to deal with cracked games and have to stay on top of hacked game patches and such. In addition, I have always preferred to purchase quality games and focus on playing a handful of them rather than download dozens of games that will just take of disk space since I'd never get the time to play through most of them. There is way more to this than just piracy. Gamers have come to expect certain features in their games. One of the reasons LAN play is so great is because it offers you the freedom to play whenever and wherever you want. You don't have to rely on your internet connection or any third-party servers. Sure, I understand that the PC market is hurting due to the rampant piracy. However, there are other ways to entice people to buy the game. For example, offer an online experience that makes it worth having a genuine product. Diablo 2 seemed to do just fine with that. Sure, people still played cracked versions, but you need a valid CD-KEY to access Battlenet. Instead of doing this, the game companies are taking the easy route and punishing their loyal fans by omitting features that we've come to expect and deserve to be in the game. Even worse is that the pirates will STILL crack the game and play single player. So, you see that we're not all pirates who just want to play LAN games with pirated copies. A lot of us are actually legitimate customers who are tired of getting punished for no good reason.

 

[spikey_monkey]

It seems to me that if this "psuedo-lan" isn't good enough for anyone, they're probably wanting to just run one retail copy on multiple machines. I'll just be happy if when battle.net crashes, I keep playing. xD

 

[ezareth]

How is this punishing people? Who honestly does not have an internet connection at ANY lan party? Last time I checked if you are going to LAN you need a ROUTER and if you have a router you almost certainly have an Internet connection. Blizzard eliminated the ping and bandwidth issue....all you need to do is authenticate...you could do it on a 2400 baud modem.

Blizzard has come up with the perfect DRM(DRM has been given a universally negative name because of poor implementation). If they integrate battle.net into Starcraft enough then for once the Pirates will not be able to crack a game without a solution that is so complex it isn't worth implementing. I'll admit there is probably an extremely minute number of people who would be negatively impacted by this, but for the vast majority of us, this is an acceptable solution that ensures at least one quality developer will keep making PC games for years to come.

I've never been a fan of DRM, especially on activation-limited games, or worse games with secureROM or other bloatware. I've always supported anti-piracy measures that have minimal inconvenience. We all are mildly inconvenienced by CD keys at very least....but we know how well those work for someone who wants to crack them.

And if Pirates crack Starcraft II, are we really losing anything here? As I mentioned before, I really don't feel like playing Console-Port PC games for the rest of my life.....they have terrible controls, and usually less than optimal graphics. If Starcraft II is going to be worth playing at LAN parties, then it will be worth going through a minor inconvenience to help ensure games like Starcraft II are made in the future.

 

[roadrunner343]

[citation][nom]knekker[/nom]Yuka, and when the game is released, you will sitting next to your mates, watching them play the game, while you wait weeks for a crack of SCII to come out. I can garantee you this, it will be some LOOOOONG boring weeks to consume, when knowing the game is out and everybody is enjoying the heck out of it.gl with that.[/citation]

You know that 9 times out of 10, pirates will have a copy before you, right?

 

[mickey21]

A lot of ignorant people out there that dont see the bigger picture. Many countries outside of the small minded mainly Americans posting that say this pseudo fix is good enough are just wrong... And I'm an American (posting from New Zealand by far a third world country)! Most countries outside of the US/Japan dont have it so good where 99% of the BROADBAND connections arent even unlimited. People pay per megabyte transmitted (both up and down) to have internet. I am basically asked to pay to play a game that constantly talks online because they want to combat piracy?! Which isnt even going to do a thing against those idiots! Not to mention a lot of people in the world that dont have unlimited internet connections even IF they have broadband!

LAN play missing is just a punch in the gut to the actual customer and wont hurt those that choose to steal the game. Is Blizzard going to give me a cheaper game in return as well for not having the cost to develop LAN play?! NO! They are going to break up the same game in three parts and charge me 3 times the amount if I want to play it start to finish!

Wise up people and stop letting these companies slowly take your basic abilities away from you in the guise of battling pirates! When in reality they are more interested in funnelling more users to their portal and trying to hock their additional wares! As well as track game play usage for their own motives.

 

[imrul]

some of us don't have a fast enough internet for bnet! real lan!

 

[ezareth]

I think we see the bigger picture just fine. You act like people in "third world" countries are going to be playing Starcraft. Those in those countries who have a computer capable of running it are going have an internet connection and countries outside of the US are where most of your piracy is going to happen.

Once again, you don't need broadband or "fast" internet to be able to authenticate on Bnet. The amount of data is minimal and I doubt Blizzard will do continuous checking throughout a game for an internet connection(once the game itself is authenticated why bother checking later?).

It is you who are not thinking of the big picture. And please don't start thinking we have rights or "abilities" when it comes to the products we purchase from a vendor. The only right we have is whether or not we purchase the product, and it is in Blizzard's and the rest of paying customers best interest to support this.

 

[Ramar]

Such a controversial topic. The facts are, however:

DRM only hurts the honest consumer; I really can't believe there are people that don't understand this. No company is ever going to beat pirates; they're only succeeding in egging them on.

Blizzard used to be a very friendly and great company. Starcraft allowed many people to run the multiplayer portion of the game from a single cd-key with an official feature called StarSpawn. They didn't even ask that everyone bought a separate copy of the game, something they had every right to do! They are obviously a different company now.

I understand most of the people commenting here are spoiled, baby-boomers' children, but you need to understand that internet is really not as easy to come by as you think. I live in a fairly populated area and still know people that never bothered getting land-lines because it was too expensive and their cell-phone reception is questionable, at best. Yes, these people DO have gaming PC's.

Setting up a giant LAN full of internet connections is a complete hassle even for professionals; I know, I used to do it. Any lan over 30 people is generally held in a large building without-you guessed it-any kind of internet access, such as a hanger or warehouse.

Lastly, and most importantly, this shunts on-duty soldiers. I'm not a huge fan of our government myself, but disrespecting a soldier is enough to make me want to find you and stomp your ass.

In between my raging at the stupidity on display here, the facts are displayed fairly clearly. If you still disagree and have a better argument than "stfu ur gay," I welcome it.

 

[ezareth]

There is no stupidity on display here other than people making generalizations like this is somehow aimed at "disrespecting soldiers". I have 2 friends and my brother in law in the army, 2 of them serving in Iraq and Kuwait. Neither has serious issues obtaining internet access while deployed in areas where they can actually use their laptop. One of them plays WoW at times with me. As we've pointed out speed is not an issue. Anywhere you LAN, you MUST have a router and once you have a router translating all of the IPs it assigns to the computers at the LAN the rest is cake. You only need one small internet connection to the router.

I was a big fan of Blizzard spawns back in the day too. But times have changed these games have to compete with the monster that is WoW and other cash cow MMOs. Blizzard is over 10 times what it was when the original Starcraft was made. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a gaming money seeking to make a profit, and protect their IP from Piracy.

I'll also agree most DRM hurts only the consumer, but not this DRM if they design it right. Your argument brings only the extreme examples where this DRM could be negative into the light without realizing that 99.9% of us playing the game have no issue with this. I also honestly doubt you know multiple people with real gaming PCs that do not have an internet connection. No one builds real gaming PCs to play single player games.

The only "facts on display" you have are pure bias and opinion(like "most the people here are spoiled, baby-boomers children")and if that is all you have to stand on you have nothing to stand on at all.

 

[kartu]

[citation][nom]zelannii[/nom]Um, Kartu, just because you could launch one PC at a time by swapping the disk around, and get 4 players all connected concurrently to the same LAN game did NOT mean that was "approved" or "expected" by Blizzard.[/citation]

Dude, you have no idea what you're talking about. You could OFFICIALLY install "Starcraft Spawn" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StarCraft And that's for UP TO EIGHT players. Oh, "FOR FREE" sort of, only original game was required.

 

[redraider89]

E[citation][nom]Ezareth[/nom]There is no stupidity on display here [/citation]

Ezareth, you are the stupid one. You can't see that what Blizzard wants to do DOES NOT do what they think it will. It WILL NOT STOP PIRACY. That is what is wrong with it. Taking out LAN play claiming that it will prevent piracy when it won't only keeps honest consumers from playing LAN games. That is ALL it will do. PERIOD. NOTHING ELSE!

 

[redraider89]

Correction, misread Ezareth. Retracting calling Ezareth stupid. But the rest of what I said is the truth.

 

[ezareth]

You are overestimating the abilities of pirates. They may get it to work on some level, but it will be an annoyance that anyone who pirates the game would have to suffer through that would make it much less widespread.

I still don't see how you think it is going to keep honest consumers from playing LAN games. You guys that keep throwing out extreme examples of where people could get screwed are failing to recognize the fact these are extreme examples. I've lanned for most of my life and never have I not had an internet connection.

Bringing up examples of "soldiers", "third world countries" and people with high end gaming machines and no internet connections are ridiculous.

When you don't have a logical argument to stand on it is easy to resort to baseless attacks, but the fact is only people truly inconvenienced by *this* form of DRM are the pirates.

 

[redraider89]

Ezareth, the reason it won't work is it doesn't keep people from playing it. All that would do is keep people from playing multiplayer. Pirates will still play the game, which most people play single player most of the time. And I'm not using any extreme examples. So Blizzard is making honest consumers have to hassle with authenticating on the internet for absolutely no reason since that won't stop pirates from pirating it. It won't stop a player from playing single player, the way most players will play most of the time. So forcing people to authenticate on the internet won't stop piracy. Multiplayer is only to make the game funner by allowing people to play with other people, but it won't keep a pirated copy from being played.

 

[Ramar]

Ezareth:

You tell me I don't have a logical argument, but what you're actually doing is calling me a liar.

None of those are extreme as you seem to think, and I have experienced everything I mentioned multiple times. I mean, fuck, have you ever tried to get even four computers connected to the wrong server in CS:S or Call of Duty?

None of this matters anyway; less than a week after release there will be a cracked, run directly from the folder, no check, LAN version. Same as with every other major game at LANs, even ones without ridiculous DRM.

 

[matt87_50]

[citation][nom]etrom[/nom]Damn you, guys. I see no difference between Valve's Steam and what Blizzard will implemente next year. You can play CS or TF2 on LAN, but you'll have to connect the internet to logon your Steam Account, and then you'll be able to open the game and play in a "pseudo LAN" also.[/citation]

this is not correct, with steam you can go into offline mode and still play lan, so before you go to a LAN you log on, get all the updates then switch to offline mode, then you can just go to the LAN without the net and play your games!

of course if you had been to a LAN lately you would know this, and you may also have some idea why we think this blizzard approach is retarded!

steam is good.

Also, psudo lan isn't a 'feature', it is a side effect of internet p2p gaming!

back in the day, of cs for instance, everyone's net was shit, so for online play, everyone would connect to a commercial dedicated server with high bandwidth, so it could handle most of the data.

these days, our internet is good enough that one of the players can just act as the "server" and it basically ends up being a p2p connection. so if the only two players in the game are in the same LAN, the only data communication is between the two players and thus it just communicates through the lan.. it doesn't like "go out to the net and then back again"
even if the game thinks that the other player is "on the internet" and only has his internet ip, your data will just go out to the router and the router will "send the packet to itself", then send it to the other player.

BLIZZARD SHOULD GET NO PROPS FOR ANNOUNCING THAT THEY ARE DOING THIS! ITS NOT A FEATURE!

 

[Guest]

Blizzard needs to accept pseudo money (Will my bits of string and crumpled paper work?) for there games with pseudo LAN. This is not the same blizzard, you had millions of sales for starcraft, don't kill the goose that laid the golden egg

 

[Guest]

The simple fact is that most LAN parties are held specifically in areas without internet connection, since this is their only multiplayer option, and this solution does nothing to help these people.

Additionally, unlike any other PC games, this game requires internet connection even for single-player mode, to both validate the user and the computer its being used on. For example, you buy the game and install, yet are never asked for your validation code; but instead, are required to log into your Battle.net account before playing single player campaign .

Is this good or bad? I don't know, but it is a first by requiring online access for single player game.

 

[roadrunner343]

Seriously? A year later? You're serious? And no, it's not a first. Go away.