EPTOn March 22 2011 00:44 MyNameIsAlex wrote:
I would try it on virtualpc but link is down?
I would try it on virtualpc but link is down?
try google cache
Claims of Chinese crack allowing lan mode - Page 14
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
mmdmmd
722 Posts
try google cache | ||
|
Zeke50100
United States2220 Posts
...Lol. They don't "Add" it to battle.net. It exists because their servers aren't the greatest (and your internet sucks if you're getting 250 ms on battle.net. Even I don't get that). | ||
|
goiflin
Canada1218 Posts
On March 22 2011 00:43 dakalro wrote: Cross region play isn't supported because according to their internal standards they can't provide a decent quality of play due to 1 player getting shafted on the latency. And the technology to allow both to have even latencies or low enough latencies doesn't exist yet. If they opened up cross-realm they'd have all the paying customers trying it and whining. If they made it hard to enable, people would mess it up and complain again. This way it's better for them that they remove a source of complaints (why is my game so slow) and gain more money from hardcore players. I mean would you play CS on a server with 15 ms or on one with 215ms? Transoceanic cables do that to latency. As for WoW botters, sure, they bot to their heart's content until the ban waves come, and then thousands of accounts get banned. It is a better strategy compared to banning as soon as you have proof someone is cheating. If you ban immediately you force bot makers to accelerate development knowing well that they'll always find a way to get out a new bot asap. If you wait and store data for all accounts that cheat over 1 year the bot devs will have little incentive to change hiding techniques, you can catch a lot more cheaters with a lot less effort. Plus if I'd make a bot that worked for half a year without a problem I'd have a really hard time getting back into developing for it again, getting to know the code again, why I did certain things etc. The less they change warden and the less they ban the slower they force bot development. Yeah, that tech doesn't exist, alright. Did you ever play on iCCup? There's also alot of botters on WoW. Like, it's insane how many there are. Ban waves don't do anything to developers who actively update their material to keep out of the warden definition list, which do exist. | ||
|
DrGreen
Poland708 Posts
On March 22 2011 00:43 dakalro wrote: Cross region play isn't supported because according to their internal standards they can't provide a decent quality of play due to 1 player getting shafted on the latency. And the technology to allow both to have even latencies or low enough latencies doesn't exist yet. If they opened up cross-realm they'd have all the paying customers trying it and whining. If they made it hard to enable, people would mess it up and complain again. This way it's better for them that they remove a source of complaints (why is my game so slow) and gain more money from hardcore players. I mean would you play CS on a server with 15 ms or on one with 215ms? Transoceanic cables do that to latency. As for WoW botters, sure, they bot to their heart's content until the ban waves come, and then thousands of accounts get banned. It is a better strategy compared to banning as soon as you have proof someone is cheating. If you ban immediately you force bot makers to accelerate development knowing well that they'll always find a way to get out a new bot asap. If you wait and store data for all accounts that cheat over 1 year the bot devs will have little incentive to change hiding techniques, you can catch a lot more cheaters with a lot less effort. Plus if I'd make a bot that worked for half a year without a problem I'd have a really hard time getting back into developing for it again, getting to know the code again, why I did certain things etc. The less they change warden and the less they ban the slower they force bot development. It doesn't hurt to add server selection on login + info that you may have high ping on other servers then your region. The only reason for no cross-region play is $$$$$. | ||
|
hmsrenown
Canada1263 Posts
On March 21 2011 16:23 Selith wrote: Unless I'm missing something, Blizzard cannot release any game in China if Chinese government says no. They only recently got the permission from the Chinese government to launch the official Chinese version. And it will only be on the shelf in Q3 by the most optimistic outlook. Now I would imagine blizzard eventually cave in and support LAN on legal copies of the game. | ||
|
BaBaUTZ
Germany146 Posts
The build in Delay in bnet 2.0 ist at 125 ms afaik. It was changed in the beta. So its not as bad as in scbw/wc3. | ||
|
dakalro
Romania525 Posts
On March 22 2011 00:49 DrGreen wrote: It doesn't hurt to add server selection on login + info that you may have high ping on other servers then your region. The only reason for no cross-region play is $$$$$. Yes but people would still try and still complain, it's not something that actually works. It's like putting "Attention: hot product" on hot coffee but some people still get burned. Plus there's extra money in it. | ||
|
Al Bundy
7257 Posts
On March 22 2011 00:49 DrGreen wrote: It doesn't hurt to add server selection on login + info that you may have high ping on other servers then your region. The only reason for no cross-region play is $$$$$. And so? What are you going to do then? All I see in this thread is blah blah blah sc2 isn't perfect. | ||
|
Alver
United States177 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On March 22 2011 00:43 dakalro wrote: Cross region play isn't supported because according to their internal standards they can't provide a decent quality of play due to 1 player getting shafted on the latency. And the technology to allow both to have even latencies or low enough latencies doesn't exist yet. If they opened up cross-realm they'd have all the paying customers trying it and whining. If they made it hard to enable, people would mess it up and complain again. This way it's better for them that they remove a source of complaints (why is my game so slow) and gain more money from hardcore players. I mean would you play CS on a server with 15 ms or on one with 215ms? Transoceanic cables do that to latency. As for WoW botters, sure, they bot to their heart's content until the ban waves come, and then thousands of accounts get banned. It is a better strategy compared to banning as soon as you have proof someone is cheating. If you ban immediately you force bot makers to accelerate development knowing well that they'll always find a way to get out a new bot asap. If you wait and store data for all accounts that cheat over 1 year the bot devs will have little incentive to change hiding techniques, you can catch a lot more cheaters with a lot less effort. Plus if I'd make a bot that worked for half a year without a problem I'd have a really hard time getting back into developing for it again, getting to know the code again, why I did certain things etc. The less they change warden and the less they ban the slower they force bot development. Are you a blizzard shill or something? Do you know how they solved "paying customers whining" in SC1 and WC3? They had a little disclaimer when you picked server, something like this: Please choose the server closest to your geographical location to ensure an optimal playing experience Yeah. But suddenly 12 years later the technology isnt there? No, it has nothing to do with that and everything to do with not wanting people to buy copies from cheaper regions -.- Its overall quite a joke. Man, they could just limit online sales based on region and then if someone wants to buy the game from China and pay for physical shipping, they can go ahead. Honestly, its a joke. Oh and of course the fact that they want full control of everything. | ||
|
goiflin
Canada1218 Posts
On March 22 2011 00:52 dakalro wrote: Yes but people would still try and still complain, it's not something that actually works. It's like putting "Attention: hot product" on hot coffee but some people still get burned. Plus there's extra money in it. Well yes, while LAN would be nice, the ability to play cross region without paying extra certainly would be better than having to buy three accounts to play cross region, regardless of lag. We'd still complain because LAN functionality would solve the lag issue, or even just a peer-to-peer connection. Oh no, people complaining about buying stuff with less shit in it than it's predecessor. Imagine that. Not only are video games the only product that can do stuff like this, but they're also the only product with fans who would actually defend this practice. | ||
|
alexhard
Sweden317 Posts
On March 22 2011 00:47 Zeke50100 wrote: ...Lol. They don't "Add" it to battle.net. It exists because their servers aren't the greatest (and your internet sucks if you're getting 250 ms on battle.net. Even I don't get that). Yes, they do. See a few pages back. | ||
|
leakingpear
United Kingdom302 Posts
Artificially adding delay to a LAN mode. KeSPA becoming software pirates for no apparent reason out of nowhere. Blizzard haven't put in LAN mode out of a desire to control the masses, not because of the insanely obvious piracy concerns rooted in iCCup/PGTour/WGTour type systems that circumvent having to buy the game entirely. I'm sure there's at least 2 or 3 more of these, this might be the funniest thread in teamliquid history! | ||
|
GrackGyver
61 Posts
On March 22 2011 00:43 dakalro wrote: Cross region play isn't supported because according to their internal standards they can't provide a decent quality of play due to 1 player getting shafted on the latency. And the technology to allow both to have even latencies or low enough latencies doesn't exist yet. With all due respect this is something I don't understand about TL.. Why do the mods ban for balance whine, but not for ridiculous claims like this that do nothing but pollute discussions with ignorance? Do we as the end user community want to intentionally cripple the game we're going to try and support as an Esport? No? Then let's not make ridiculous claims about "the technology" not being there yet. It has been and not being able to play internationally without buying more copies of the game and running multiple installs in a 2010 RTS is pretty ridiculous. The only thing their "region lock" is is a cash grab. | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On March 22 2011 00:44 dakalro wrote: Why not? they already add it to battle.net. I'm assuming they have a good reason for it, either the fact that there's a huge difference between 10ms and 150 ms but not as big between 135ms and 275 ms in the way the game works or because it's some sort of human reaction buffer. Because they added it to both WC3 and SC1 (bnet) but not to the LAN play of either of these games. The thing is, the reason for adding it to online play has no relevance when you are on LAN, and there are no differing connections to deal with. | ||
|
goiflin
Canada1218 Posts
On March 22 2011 00:59 leakingpear wrote: The sheer level of incredible stupidity in this thread is astounding, I mean really, just from skimming the thread these things are being seriously discussed: Artificially adding delay to a LAN mode. KeSPA becoming software pirates for no apparent reason out of nowhere. Blizzard haven't put in LAN mode out of a desire to control the masses, not because of the insanely obvious piracy concerns rooted in iCCup/PGTour/WGTour type systems that circumvent having to buy the game entirely. I'm sure there's at least 2 or 3 more of these, this might be the funniest thread in teamliquid history! If this LAN client is real, then those pirate servers may be making a comeback, which would make controlling who gets to do what on bnet, the only reason to not give LAN functions to the actual client. | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On March 22 2011 00:59 leakingpear wrote: The sheer level of incredible stupidity in this thread is astounding, I mean really, just from skimming the thread these things are being seriously discussed: Artificially adding delay to a LAN mode. KeSPA becoming software pirates for no apparent reason out of nowhere. Blizzard haven't put in LAN mode out of a desire to control the masses, not because of the insanely obvious piracy concerns rooted in iCCup/PGTour/WGTour type systems that circumvent having to buy the game entirely. I'm sure there's at least 2 or 3 more of these, this might be the funniest thread in teamliquid history! WGTour was played on Battle.net. And Im pretty sure its almost as much about control as its about piracy for LAN. Not of the masses, but of esports. | ||
|
btlyger
United States470 Posts
On March 22 2011 00:56 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Yeah. But suddenly 12 years later the technology isnt there? No, it has nothing to do with that and everything to do with not wanting people to buy copies from cheaper regions -.- Its overall quite a joke. Man, they could just limit online sales based on region and then if someone wants to buy the game from China and pay for physical shipping, they can go ahead. Honestly, its a joke. Oh and of course the fact that they want full control of everything. I'm glad you at least pointed out the cheaper regions being the issue and not they want people to buy multiple copies. Granted that probably helps, but its probably more like you described it. However, I don't think them wanting to control their game is a bad thing, maybe it has some negative effects on us, but starcraft1 got out of control. All of the good players weren't playing on the network they made for the game, and instead were flocking to a network that didn't require a legal purchase of the game. Sure, most people owned sc1, but its still pretty ridiculous that they didn't have to. The fact that cross realm support isn't their is an annoyance sure, but it's really not a "joke". I hate when the player I'm facing lags because its a break in the game that usually won't occur otherwise. Yes, there are ways to make the connection between the us and asia pretty fast, but you still slow down the opponent, which if you remember was a huge problem in BW on BNET. On March 22 2011 01:03 Liquid`Jinro wrote: And Im pretty sure its almost as much about control as its about piracy for LAN. Not of the masses, but of esports. I agree that they want to control how their game is presented in esports, but again, is that a bad thing? | ||
|
ThePurist
Canada686 Posts
| ||
|
RebirthOfLeGenD
USA5860 Posts
Blizzard didn't include LAN because it makes it so Chinese players have to actually buy the game, which will increase the amount of money they make off the game substantially. However I assumed there was probably a way to crack the game into a LAN mode, meaning this would eventually just punish us. | ||
| ||
