Why Blizzard Should Enable LAN to SC2/D3

[Guest]

Maybe all of as can afford to buy even just the first installment of the Game, but not all of as can afford to subscribe a fast reliable internet connection. Would you like to play with me online if I have 500 ping?

 

[Element0f0ne]

TH is really beating a dead horse. Get over it people. I've been to a LAN with up to 15 people, and we all shared the 1 shitty 5Mpbs line. During downtime between other games, up to 10 of us jumped onto WoW without a hiccup.

This is Blizzard, they handle millions of people online at once in WoW. I'm pretty sure their new B.Net will be able to handle the same.

Here's an idea: GET AN INTERNET CONNECTION. Any real PC gamer plays online with some game, so instead of fussing, just take the extra step to login to B.net, then join your friends game and play. Done. Was that so hard?

As for the LANs that don't have internet connections, than yes this sucks... but honestly, how many people will be at these "Net-less LANS" versus everyone else just playing the game at home? Why cater to a very small niche in the broader scope?

Blizzard has every right to combat piracy of their own software.

Case in point: Join the 21st century, get an internet connection and shut up.

Good riddance to the blokes who are boycotting the games. B.Net will be less retarded with you gone.

I'll be at the midnight release of both games, drive home and enjoy the hell out of them while the rest of you are still crying about LAN.

Have fun with your pirated copies you gutless thieves!

 

[Guest]

Would you not have in your possession an original copy of the greatest all time LAN game?

 

[jabliese]

Thanks for the article, glad I'm not the only one wondering how in blue blazes not enabling lan support is supposed to affect piracy.

 

[Guest]

In my opinion Blizzard cater SC2 not for the masses any more but only for the lucky selected few. Pls don't take away the essence of the great game.

 

[ansga]

The only major flaw i see in not offering LAN support is the very real chance that their servers will flop. Doesn't always happen, but the chance is still definitely there. Cause when people don't get their multiplayer fix, their customer service people are gonna get slammed hard.

 

[bounty]

maobao

"nothing was against the EULA"

Then update the EULA.


p.s. Hellgate London. While I don't see Blizzard going away soon, I think 1 time online activation for the first 2-3 years after a game release is ok. After that, patch it to be old shcool hackable or release some expansions with their own 1 time activation etc. Keep BNet players legit with checksums on all .exe files and libs or whatever, but give LAN players some flexibility to auto level everyone to level 10 and make +200% monsters hack/mod whatever.

 

[Adamk1101]

These games don't really need LAN that much now that the Internet is widely available. When the first ones came out, people still had dial-up, now you can do a LAN party over battle.net with no problems. As for Diablo, there's no sense in having LAN on there at all... except for pirated copies.

 

[amnotanoobie]

I could forsee it now, on massive gaming competitions such as World Cyber Games, etc.

"Ladies and gentlemen, now we'll be starting with the Starcraft 2 tournament."

"Oh wait, it seems that one of our players is unable to connect to BattleNet, please bear with us while we try to fix this."

..... Of course gaming events could just avoid the problem and not add it on their list of competitions. Well there goes the reason for some of these "professional cyber athletes" to play and PROMOTE the game. Way to go Blizzard.

 

[planchero]

Ok first I would like to address all the people that say just play battle net I don’t care how good it is lan is better I admit I never got into lan playing diablo 2 I was always more of a battle net fan on that game. However starcraft lan is what made it great. Sure there were people that would bum off other cds but there are very few of them that didn’t later buy the game. For the people say that well in china they are doing this and blizzard can’t stop it with lan. That’s a joke and a half blizzard can’t stop them from hacking accounts and selling gold on WOW along with a million other forms of piracy that occurs in china. There is always a way around it. I have seen WOW played on local networks, and over the internet on custom made servers. For the people that have knocked down WOW and used it as a reason for internet only WOW is a completely different scenario it a ever changing game adding features that typical game expansions add. Don’t get me wrong there are lots of problems with WOW but let’s not use that as justification for what they are doing to their non mmorpg games. I am sick of businesses blaming hackers for all their downfalls don’t get me wrong it’s a sick group of people do harm in many ways, but there is a difference in a (lets create a key to the door) philosophy and a (let’s make a key that only the manufacture holds.) This is what blizzard has done AKA activision. I don’t see myself buying starcraft 2 when it comes out because this is the type of game I love to lan with friends however as stated earlier I never got into LAN diablo 2 the gaming model for that game always seemed to make a better single player or over battlenet. I really do hope that blizzard pulls its heads out and realizes what most of us really want and leaves lan in there. I own 3 copies of starcraft and 2 copies of diablo 2 it will be 0 of starcraft2 if they don’t shape up and listen to their real fans. PS I am capable of not buy a game without eating my fingers there are games I will not play on principle. You can blame a lot on pirates but one thing holds true the more you try and protect your content the more they hack it and the only people hurt are the ones that buy it.

 

[oldschoolpcguru]

You guys are way out of line. There isn't a single one here that doesn't have an internet connection. What do you give a rip whether the packets flowing to your LAN buddy are traversing a router or not ? You still will get the same experience, only you'll have to buy a legit copy. Smart move for Blizzard. Valve too. Bravo steam. It's a great system and ensures a (usually) consistent play experience and that the developers get paid for their efforts.
I know we're all still pissed about buying 18 dollar CD's back in the day for 2 good songs, but how much P2P do you guys have to do to make up for it.
Get over yourselves, save up your allowances for the titles and let your routers do the heavy lifting. They're still going to be excellent titles.

Rock on you bunch of whining pirates.

 

[bildo123]

[citation][nom]apmyhr[/nom]They should be boycotted for this. I hate to say it though, but I'll probably get the games anyways[/citation]

No, you won't probably buy it, come release day I can guarantee you WILL buy this game, just like the rest of these hypocrites...

I can understand why so many people would get upset when they found out they actually had to pay for a game.

This is coming from someone who will probably by the overprices collectors edition as well. I'm not saying I represent everyone, but I'm throwing it out there.

 

[p00dl3_h3r0]

I don't know about anyone else here, but my Comcast cable connection SUCKS. Myself and my bro can barely play games simultaneously on it, yet alone with anyone else in the household, and especially on high load days such as weekends, when people ACTUALLY LAN it up. Yes, internet connections have come a long way, but lets face it: so have the graphics and data to send and recieve. LAN connections are still highly needed if you want to just barely play with more than 4 people, even over a good cable line. Despite who they think we are, Starcraft players are NOT WoW players. We actually believe in social interaction outside of the virtual world. Why you gotta do us dirty, Blizzard/Activision? Your slowly becoming no better than the cigarette companies...

 

[Guest]

Actually, charging an incomplete game with no LAN support whatsoever as a full featured game is what will make ME be a pirate about it.
I will not pay a single cent for the game, will wait to get a FREE pirated version and for the same pirated mods that will most likely allow for LAN gaming.

I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who thinks this way.

If any Blizzard rep reads this, please remind anyone who you are able to: this decision didn't prevent piracy, it encouraged it.

 

[Guest]

Half of the people objecting to this non-feature seem to be under the impression that a poor connection to BNET will hurt their 'BNET-hosted lan parties'. That simply isn't the case. Your latency in-game depends on your connection to the other plays in the game, period. Notice how you can get the 'Connection to Battle.net lost' message in game and yet not be dropped?

 

[bildo123]

[citation][nom]p00dl3_h3r0[/nom]I don't know about anyone else here, but my Comcast cable connection SUCKS. Myself and my bro can barely play games simultaneously on it, yet alone with anyone else in the household, and especially on high load days such as weekends, when people ACTUALLY LAN it up. Yes, internet connections have come a long way, but lets face it: so have the graphics and data to send and recieve.[/citation]

Perhaps tell your brother to throttle his bittorrents some?

(See what I did there?)

 

[Guest]

We can only assume LAN Support will not be added because sometime after launch Blizzard probably has plans to make players pay for battlenet. After all with two mega titles coming out its sure to convert some WoW players. Which we all know is Blizzards main source of monthly expendable income!

 

[Guest]

I figured I'd throw in my 2 cents here. I have enjoyed a lot of Blizzard games in the past. I bought legitimate copies of Warcraft 2, Diablo, Starcraft and 2 copies of Diablo 2 (+ LOD expansion). I absolutely refuse to purchase either of these products if there is no LAN support. I seriously hope others consider doing the same because Blizzard will not change their stance unless it hits them monetarily. To me, this is crippled software. When I purchase a game, I expect it to be able to function fully without depending on some remote server. I'll also add another advantage of LAN play over Battle.net that I haven't seen mentioned yet. With LAN play, *I* have total control over my characters. On Diablo 2 Battle.net, they delete characters that haven't been used for several months and they also delete any new character that hasn't been played continuously for several hours. This makes it harder to use characters to "mule" your items. I have lost several characters when I took a break from playing for a few months. This move by Blizzard REALLY surprises me because they have always made such great games that my friends and I have always WANTED to support them by purchasing legitimate copies. In fact, that's the main reason I got 2 copies of D2+LOD. My friend and I would get together at my house for the weekend and we'd play for hours. Sure, I could have just used a copied game with a crack, but I chose to support Blizzard because they created games that were well worth the $50 or so. In any case, the best way to communicate is with your wallet. I had been planning on purchasing at least 2 copies of D3. However, I will simply spend this money somewhere else unless they add LAN support. Seriously, there are enough decent games out there where I don't see this as being a difficult decision. I seriously hope they reconsider this as I can't imagine that they have been hurt by piracy too badly, considering their loyal fan base.

 

[mcvf]

I understand why Blizzard wants it - less hackable game, "motivation" for gamers to buy more copies. It is truth that when I used to play SC and Diablo, I have never seen a legal copy on my own eyes at that time. But honestly, this is how they got their fame. Because everybody could play them. Some people paid, some not (depending on many things including which country you live in), but for all of them it become the legacy.
What I see now? Business model to force players to buy it to enjoy online content is working, I bought/considered already many games just because of it. So at first glance it is successful model. But there is a big BUT. You shall not play such a game with legends like SC and Diablo, because these legendary products made the name of the company and are responsible for most of revenue of Blizzard in later years. We leave in world of branding, Blizzard is loosing by putting dirt on its own brand. I believe that in long term Blizzard would profit even if these games would be given for free, due to their fame which possibly will arise. If I would be in Blizzard place, which I am not, I would give fans of SC and Diablo a product they like, completely free for hacking/pirating and wouldn't care for profits from these game. Because, I would know that THIS is what makes me sell them fifty of not-so-great-but-expensive-games later and which would make me rich. Their new MMO can go out soon, I wouldn't risk bad advertising of the Blizzard company name if they want more people to give out such money for this title.
To conclude: Your ideas, Blizzard, might make sense, but only if it would not be such legendary titles as Starcraft and Diablo.

 

[cracklint]

I buy maybe 1 to 2 pc games a year. I don't have the income to try games on a whim. I usually listen to gamer reviews (not critics) before I decide to lay down my cash. I was extremely excited about this game and wanted nothing more than to reward blizzard for a quality title. Now, I will treat it like any other mediocre title that releases: pirate it, or buy it used.

I understand that developers who make mediocre games want revenue to, but those games have no value to me. It's like a bad movie on the sci-fi channel. Have I watched them?....Yes. Would I pay to watch them?...Hell no! Nor does anyone expect me too. Duke Nukem' 3d, Soldier of Fortune, SoF 2 (disappointment) Half-life, Half-life 2, Unreal, ut tournatment, ut 2003, ut 2004, unreal 3 (disappointment), Morrowind, Oblivion, Call of Duty, and other games that weren't as good, are games that I purchased because I beleived them to be worth the 40-50 dollar price. Developers know what is out there and the standards needed to sell a game, but some turn out generic gargabe to turn a buck and then get pissed when someone pirates it.

With a title like SC2, blizzard should be happy with an IP that will sell at least 2 million copies on name and hype alone. The only reason I see that they would resort to such extremes is that they know that it might not capitalize on the laurels of the original or they have future plans to some how milk more money out of their customers through battlenet, which is more likely.

Successful developers and publishers of huge IP's (i.e. bungie) have enormous egos when releasing sequels of this magnitude. They think they can give less for more at an inflated price just because they have a premium brand name. Look forwarded to Blizzard setting the trend of bastardizing the pure gaming experience that Starcraft and Diablo was.

 

[Guest]

A "digital download" when provided a legit serial number? Digital as opposed to what, exactly?

 

[bigredfed]

There is a petitition,go sign it:

http://www.petitiononline.com/LANSC2/petition.html

 

[steiner666]

amen to the article.

but don't worry, blizzard may **** you over, but the pirates will deliver a LAN play workaround regardless.

 

[Guest]

For all you folks saying you won't buy this game if it doesn't support LAN play, stop kidding yourself. You will buy it. In any case, this sounds like a purely financial decision from higher-ups. How do you monetize LAN-play? There doesn't seem to be a good way to do so, so why bother with it. They're already triple potential profits by splitting it into a base game and two expansions if you want to play the other races. Why not force everyone to play on BattleNet where at least they will be served ads, if not charged sometime in the future?

 

[IzzyCraft]

Greed against people stealing their game? What do we call that again... Maybe i should steal your money and you can't protect youself when i do it again and again. LAN arguments are weak. There are better way to code *** now rts games when coded properly can have an a latency = to that of the slowest person on the network. Maybe you should Talk to Master Of Choas who coded latency changer for ChaosLauncher the number 1, 3rd party program used in SC now of days and is supported by the ICCUP and BrianClan the 2 biggest battle.net alternatives.

Only arguments for keeping LAN is if 1 you live in like Australia where the internet is shitty 99.99% of the time and more then like 2 people online = 400% of your bandwidth. So a LAN over P2P which is what sc2 should be it is what every other Blizzard rts game is, might become hard. 2 Disconnects although rare in LAN should increase just a smeg while having it go over a p2p protocol. Guess What Battle.net is just a site where you can connect to peers directly =p.

Many games lack real lan anyways.

Why would you play over a Virtual Lan in the first place is beyond me that's just a way to comestible for a built in lag int he game for a given protocol. Most people who play over so call "lan" play on illegal servers hosting virtual lan services anyways which justifies blizzard position. IE things like Hamachi, Garena, Honfnag.

At least a good 95% of Legit copies of StarCraft:BroodWar is played over a Battle.net or Battle.net type of area like ICCUP or BrianClan. So why don't you minority whiners stfu it's why appease the 56k users when the vast majority of the users are 256kb or better. Same Logic...

It's their game they can do wth they want with it.

Battle.net is free service if it vanishes then start to complain.

Having no initial lan support stops the day 0 though 2 week pirates as you can only really pirate the game up to the campaign after which they need an infrastructure to play illegally on which won't be the already up virtual lan areas. Making those who would pirate other then buy have to wait much longer forcing more of them to buy to get full access to the game. Not every game can be like sins of a solar empire where it's easy to pirate hard to play mulitplayer.