|
On September 21 2011 17:24 Truedot wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 17:19 chiboni wrote:
Pretty much what some people said. There is no reason for LAN (expect for major tournaments, no lagg etc.) because now everyone is ONLINE. I doubt you sitting in a room with your friends, having a 'LAN' and you are not ONLINE while playing.
So it sounds more like 'Why do i have to pay X copys when i want to play with my friends,even so one of us owns a copy'.
Also that with the emulated server is no big suprise.. WOW Addon Cataclysm was emulated/datamined the day F&F Alpha came out.
So i guess its common for client sided games ? because everyone has infinity bandwidth, herpaderp. Let me break it down for you: the more people at your house playing, the laggier it gets, NOT just because of going through the internet, to a server thats far away, and then back to your house, for THE EXACT SAME GAME IN THE SAME ROOM, but because that also taxes your internet throughput and your ROUTER throughput, especially when it has to wait for more info to come from the far away internet. people who say there's no reason for lan becauise everyone can connect ot the internet, blah blah blah, are just apologists who don't understand how the internet actually works, and who don't care about people being denied the right to play their game wherever, without a connection to the internet neecessary. As its been said, piraters and hackers already can do these things. tl;dr, anyone who argues that having internet at a location means LAN is useless doesn't understand bandwidth and is an idiot. Or maybe, they could be one of those people hired at .2 cents by blizz/activision to keep pushing their agenda on forums in droves so that everyone else starts thinking the same way.
LAN != SP
!!for me LAN ist more people playing offline multiplayer!!
(or online... mostly together in one room)
creator of this blog said:
... Few friends, few beers, whole night to play, etc. Back in d2 days we could OFFICIALLY just get 1 copy of d2+lod, install it on all of our computers and play via LAN, no problem. Going online on battle.net was a different story - only 1 cd-key allowed, which was fair enough. Those who were diehard fans ended up buying their copies, those who just wanted to have fun for a night didn't. All good. ...
I just dont think the argument is ok to say 'cant play together with mates, cause we all need to buy it' to have a offline multiplayer...
I dont know if the Singelplayer needs an internet connection or not (If so, THAT would be stupid and dumb). But the multiplayer ist there that you can play together, with people who actualy OWN the game. So imo it is ok that the multiplayer is online. So Blizzard can atleast try to prevent pircay (Even so it wont work). And like people above said, the bandwidth is not a big deal with (people playing online) < 5 - 15 !
tl;dr  IMO: Singeplayer = Offline ; Multiplayer = Online
|
i travel a LOT and hotels in australia doesn't have free wifi =[ really bugs me that i can't play offline when i want to
|
On September 21 2011 20:43 Doraemon wrote:
i travel a LOT and hotels in australia doesn't have free wifi =[ really bugs me that i can't play offline when i want to
Shut up, stop bitching you should have internet available everywhere! Its your own fault or something like that.
JK
WTF is everyone in this threat defending blizzard smoking? Because I want some!
1. Pirate dont pay ether way
2. Why punish you paying customers?
3. Im 100% ok with logging into battle.net first. Then ounce I've logged in, let me play LAN with my friends sitting across the table form me, without lag.
|
I personally do not have a problem with no LAN and always online, so long as the hacks, dupes, and bots stay out. I spat out some of my morning coffee reading this post:
+ Show Spoiler +On September 21 2011 17:24 Truedot wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 17:19 chiboni wrote:
Pretty much what some people said. There is no reason for LAN (expect for major tournaments, no lagg etc.) because now everyone is ONLINE. I doubt you sitting in a room with your friends, having a 'LAN' and you are not ONLINE while playing.
So it sounds more like 'Why do i have to pay X copys when i want to play with my friends,even so one of us owns a copy'.
Also that with the emulated server is no big suprise.. WOW Addon Cataclysm was emulated/datamined the day F&F Alpha came out.
So i guess its common for client sided games ? because everyone has infinity bandwidth, herpaderp. Let me break it down for you: the more people at your house playing, the laggier it gets, NOT just because of going through the internet, to a server thats far away, and then back to your house, for THE EXACT SAME GAME IN THE SAME ROOM, but because that also taxes your internet throughput and your ROUTER throughput, especially when it has to wait for more info to come from the far away internet. people who say there's no reason for lan becauise everyone can connect ot the internet, blah blah blah, are just apologists who don't understand how the internet actually works, and who don't care about people being denied the right to play their game wherever, without a connection to the internet neecessary. As its been said, piraters and hackers already can do these things. tl;dr, anyone who argues that having internet at a location means LAN is useless doesn't understand bandwidth and is an idiot. Or maybe, they could be one of those people hired at .2 cents by blizz/activision to keep pushing their agenda on forums in droves so that everyone else starts thinking the same way.
For now, I have faith Blizzard will be somewhat successful at eliminating most of it. And Truedot... no, just no. No more of that. That post was terribly wrong, despite your efforts for all the right reasons.
|
On September 21 2011 21:19 NoobStyles wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 20:43 Doraemon wrote:
i travel a LOT and hotels in australia doesn't have free wifi =[ really bugs me that i can't play offline when i want to Shut up, stop bitching you should have internet available everywhere! Its your own fault or something like that. JK WTF is everyone in this threat defending blizzard smoking? Because I want some! 1. Pirate dont pay ether way 2. Why punish you paying customers? 3. Im 100% ok with logging into battle.net first. Then ounce I've logged in, let me play LAN with my friends sitting across the table form me, without lag.
The reason I'm defending Blizzard is because all the reasons for LAN are ridiculous laments of "loyal customers" because they want to play the game for free.
I'm a pirate, and if I deem a game worth paying for, I'm going to buy it to support that company so they can make more great games.
How are they punishing paying customers exactly? Have you considered that allowing LAN is hurting and punishing the company more than your itty bitty little feelings of entitlement as a paying customer who should get whatever he wants?
Your third option isn't possible because of the way the game works. Everything that happens in the game happens on the battle.net servers, not in the game client.
|
Man, I'll have to agree with eu.exodus on this one. I am gonna dl and play the hacked version if I don't get into beta. I mean, it won't keep me from buying the game, that is definite. But I just can't wait. I'm not that moral of a person. I know this is illegal but come on... :/ the wait is KILLING ME
|
|
|
United States22883 Posts
On September 21 2011 16:56 TheRabidDeer wrote:
There is no need to have LAN for a game like D3.
The reason is that the actual D3 will get stale very quickly, just like D2 did. Of course it was addictive, but objectively D2 wasn't a very good game and was extremely shallow.
What LAN/Open Bnet allow are mods, which are what make most modern games better.
|
"Minimal amount of game data emulated, none of which includes the server-side random content generation or creation" does not equal "D3 hacked already".
|
Not saying I don't miss SCBW LAN for the sake of tournaments, but I really don't understand why people find it necessary to beat a horse that has been as dead as it has been for ages.
Even if D3 becomes fully hacked, it is simply irrelevant in regards to the future of LAN. Why? Because there is no future for LAN and it has been stated many times. Just because Blizzard w as coaxed to add chat channels, don't think the community has any power deciding anything at all in regards to Blizzards stance anti-piracy procedure, online-only (aka maximizing business profits.)
The existence of work-arounds only effects those savvy enough to use them. Eliminating LAN mode forces casual mcDad and his son casual mcJoey, who purchase games not out of a hardcore mindset, but as impulse consumers, to buy two copies of the game instead of one if they want to play together. Believe it or not, our kind is a vocal minority. Of the 11 million World of Warcraft subscribers, for example, the Blizzard forums only contain posts from a couple million at the most. r/diablo on reddit has less than 10,000 subscribers of which know about the D3 Hack, plus the word of mouth it drove to other websites. While that number probably adds up to be something substantial, it is nowhere near the millions of to-be players in the market, the majority of which would rather buy a copy of the game than even consider looking for work-arounds or reminiscing the days of LAN games.
Yes, LAN would make it better for the gamers, for many many reasons, but it is foolish to think that, from a business standpoint, it is a good idea. Yes, I have read certain indy developers and musicians articles where they welcome piracy because it introduces their product to a larger crowd, whereupon the more exposure a product gets, the more customers it gets. Such a system works better when things cost $10-20. When you have full fledged games for $50-60, though, I imagine you'll get more business forcing people to play on battle.net than you would expecting people to steal a game, beat it, and invest such high amounts of money in to it for what may or may not have the re-playability of a music CD. That isn't to say I wont have 10 level 60 d3 characters and be replaying it out the ass, but consider that casual mcDad and his son casual mcJoey won't.
|
On September 21 2011 21:32 SolHeiM wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 21:19 NoobStyles wrote:On September 21 2011 20:43 Doraemon wrote:
i travel a LOT and hotels in australia doesn't have free wifi =[ really bugs me that i can't play offline when i want to Shut up, stop bitching you should have internet available everywhere! Its your own fault or something like that. JK WTF is everyone in this threat defending blizzard smoking? Because I want some! 1. Pirate dont pay ether way 2. Why punish you paying customers? 3. Im 100% ok with logging into battle.net first. Then ounce I've logged in, let me play LAN with my friends sitting across the table form me, without lag. The reason I'm defending Blizzard is because all the reasons for LAN are ridiculous laments of "loyal customers" because they want to play the game for free.
Maybe the only reason you buy games is because the publisher make it completely impossible to play for free, personally I buy games I play
I'm a pirate, and if I deem a game worth paying for, I'm going to buy it to support that company so they can make more great games.
cool
How are they punishing paying customers exactly? Have you considered that allowing LAN is hurting and punishing the company more than your itty bitty little feelings of entitlement as a paying customer who should get whatever he wants?
The paying customer gets what ever the paying customer pays for. And in this case it will be a game without LAN for this paying customer. But, why are you talking about the removal of LAN like its the best thing since sliced bread? Hell I'd be lucky to play a game like D3 over LAN ounce a year, even if it was in the game. That docent mean I'm going to come onto a forum and start defending Blizzard for removing a feature. If Apple one day decided to remove mouse support for OSX, would I defend that decision even though I don't use MACs? of course not. Why are people defending a company for removing a feature?
Your third option isn't possible because of the way the game works. Everything that happens in the game happens on the battle.net servers, not in the game client.
Not really my problem
I know blizzard if under no obligation to me, to provide LAN. That docent mean I need to be happy about it being removed. Blizzard is actively choosing to no include LAN in future games. Why would I be happy with this and defending it?I know Ive sad some variation of that about 4 times this post, but I simply cannot understand why people are defending a company for removing features they traditionally have offered in their products.
|
On September 21 2011 22:36 NoobStyles wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 21:32 SolHeiM wrote:On September 21 2011 21:19 NoobStyles wrote:On September 21 2011 20:43 Doraemon wrote:
i travel a LOT and hotels in australia doesn't have free wifi =[ really bugs me that i can't play offline when i want to Shut up, stop bitching you should have internet available everywhere! Its your own fault or something like that. JK WTF is everyone in this threat defending blizzard smoking? Because I want some! 1. Pirate dont pay ether way 2. Why punish you paying customers? 3. Im 100% ok with logging into battle.net first. Then ounce I've logged in, let me play LAN with my friends sitting across the table form me, without lag. The reason I'm defending Blizzard is because all the reasons for LAN are ridiculous laments of "loyal customers" because they want to play the game for free. Maybe the only reason you buy games is because the publisher make it completely impossible to play for free, personally I buy games I play Show nested quote +
I'm a pirate, and if I deem a game worth paying for, I'm going to buy it to support that company so they can make more great games.
cool Show nested quote +
How are they punishing paying customers exactly? Have you considered that allowing LAN is hurting and punishing the company more than your itty bitty little feelings of entitlement as a paying customer who should get whatever he wants?
The paying customer gets what ever the paying customer pays for. And in this case it will be a game without LAN for this paying customer. But, why are you talking about the removal of LAN like its the best thing since sliced bread? Hell I'd be lucky to play a game like D3 over LAN ounce a year, even if it was in the game. That docent mean I'm going to come onto a forum and start defending Blizzard for removing a feature. If Apple one day decided to remove mouse support for OSX, would I defend that decision even though I don't use MACs? of course not. Why are people defending a company for removing a feature? Show nested quote +
Your third option isn't possible because of the way the game works. Everything that happens in the game happens on the battle.net servers, not in the game client.
Not really my problem I know blizzard if under no obligation to me, to provide LAN. That docent mean I need to be happy about it being removed. Blizzard is actively choosing to no include LAN in future games. Why would I be happy with this and defending it?I know Ive sad some variation of that about 4 times this post, but I simply cannot understand why people are defending a company for removing features they traditionally have offered in their products.
Right. If you think that Blizzard removing LAN is the same thing as Apple removing the Mouse for their computers, I'm going to give up right now. Because there is no point in arguing with an idiot.
|
On September 21 2011 22:40 SolHeiM wrote:Right. If you think that Blizzard removing LAN is the same thing as Apple removing the Mouse for their computers, I'm going to give up right now. Because there is no point in arguing with an idiot.
Maybe you should look at the actual intent of the guy's very simple simile instead of resorting to nitpicking and ad hominems... or provide counterpoints that aren't strawmen because all you've managed so far is to make youself look like you don't have a leg to stand on...
|
I won't use it, but I'm glad it got hacked. Blizzard's anti-hack jank is pretty bad.
|
On September 21 2011 14:23 Inori wrote:
Blizzard tries to justify it with better anti-hack, yet game is already hacked without even beta being fully out.
From what I read of you're post, you're mistaking a 'hack' for an 'emulator'. Someone developed a program that emulated Blizzard's server signal, thus making D3 think it is online. This was always going to happen, it was just a matter of time. (I'm actually pretty impressed by how fast this happened, but not surprised).
The important thing you're missing here: Blizzard's 'Online Only' stance was never intended to completely stop people from pirating the game (that's impossible). This move was necessary because of the Real Money Auction House.
The fact that items in D3 will have a real world value means that Blizzard has to do everything they can to prevent people from 'duping' items like they did in D2. The 'online only' mode they have chosen means that the list of all items your character has will reside on their servers, not on your computer. This "hack" you're talking about will not affect any legitimate characters you have on the Blizzard servers; what you do in the hack, stays in the hack. The RMAH stays untouched.
I can completely understand where you're coming from, offline and lan play is a feature I will miss too. But let's not kid ourselves, the online only mode is still serving its purpose. Someone will either need to directly hack Blizzard's servers or pull an inside job in order to subvert their goal of a secure RMAH.
(P.S.: While I'm not entirely sold on the trade for an RMAH by losing offline play, its starting to grow on me. That's more to do with the interesting legal implications of virtual items in games becoming real personal property that can be traded, as it pushes legal boundaries and I'm looking forward to watching the development.)
|
Germany2896 Posts
On September 21 2011 23:33 Big Jim Slade wrote:
This move was necessary because of the Real Money Auction House.
The fact that items in D3 will have a real world value means that Blizzard has to do everything they can to prevent people from 'duping' items like they did in D2. The 'online only' mode they have chosen means that the list of all items your character has will reside on their servers, not on your computer. This "hack" you're talking about will not affect any legitimate characters you have on the Blizzard servers; what you do in the hack, stays in the hack. The RMAH stays untouched.
Closed battle.net has been like this in D2. LAN/Open Bnet characters are separate. Of course the auction house makes only sense on the on the closed bnet part.
Duping in D2 worked despite storing that stuff on the server. It exploited the server in some way. Often desynchronizing the way multiple bnet servers interact. Preventing dupes requires careful design of the server side, but is no reason to disable LAN.
|
Few friends, few beers, whole night to play, etc. Back in d2 days we could OFFICIALLY just get 1 copy of d2+lod, install it on all of our computers and play via LAN, no problem. Going online on battle.net was a different story - only 1 cd-key allowed, which was fair enough. Those who were diehard fans ended up buying their copies, those who just wanted to have fun for a night didn't. All good.
lol this is exactly why it was worth it to Blizzard
|
On September 21 2011 23:33 Big Jim Slade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 14:23 Inori wrote:
Blizzard tries to justify it with better anti-hack, yet game is already hacked without even beta being fully out.
The important thing you're missing here: Blizzard's 'Online Only' stance was never intended to completely stop people from pirating the game (that's impossible). This move was necessary because of the Real Money Auction House.
That's what they say. They pretty much bullshitted their way when they said SC2 was going to be online only and gave shady reasons to make themselves look good.
The game is perfectly playable without real money auction house, so LAN would have absolutely no effect on that.
I would argue that Blizzard is just lying about D3's online-only also. My opinion (which may be wrong) is that the main reason is to reduce pirating (not shut it down).
|
On September 22 2011 00:26 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 23:33 Big Jim Slade wrote:On September 21 2011 14:23 Inori wrote:
Blizzard tries to justify it with better anti-hack, yet game is already hacked without even beta being fully out.
The important thing you're missing here: Blizzard's 'Online Only' stance was never intended to completely stop people from pirating the game (that's impossible). This move was necessary because of the Real Money Auction House. That's what they say. They pretty much bullshitted their way when they said SC2 was going to be online only and gave shady reasons to make themselves look good. The game is perfectly playable without real money auction house, so LAN would have absolutely no effect on that. I would argue that Blizzard is just lying about D3's online-only also. My opinion (which may be wrong) is that the main reason is to reduce pirating (not shut it down).
It is wrong. They're not stupid. They know you can't stop hackers no matter how hard they try. Even with 256-bit encryption its merely a matter of time before someone cracks the code. Online-only has the same effect; only slowing them down.
The real purpose of Online-only is exactly what they've described; so people can play their Single-player characters in a hack-free environment, then choose to join the online world without having to reroll - the #1 reason why people didn't play multiplayer in the first two, and similar games. And everyone knows that a more vibrant multiplayer base leads to a long-running franchise.
It's their attempt to evolve a genre, not another futile gesture to stop hackers.
|
On September 21 2011 21:45 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 16:56 TheRabidDeer wrote:
There is no need to have LAN for a game like D3. The reason is that the actual D3 will get stale very quickly, just like D2 did. Of course it was addictive, but objectively D2 wasn't a very good game and was extremely shallow. What LAN/Open Bnet allow are mods, which are what make most modern games better.
open b.net vs closed b.net in d2 was hackers vs botters. Problem was hackers way of playing was just hack an item till op see if you can kill other ppl, bots was like running a sim game where you collect shit, tweak a few things then sell it for FG in d2jsp.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
