EPTClaims of Chinese crack allowing lan mode - Page 8
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
dras
Kazakhstan376 Posts
| ||
|
XsebT
Denmark2980 Posts
On March 21 2011 17:43 iCCup.Diamond wrote: Just to clear up two things 1: No iCCup SC2 server, not happening. 2: No tournament that has a license from Blizzard would EVER in hell get permission to use this crack. That being said, this should encourage companies like ESL and MLG to lean on Blizz more about this 1990's basic feature missing from the largest ESport in the world right now... Think we're talking about the idea here... It doesn't have to be iccup making this.  It nice to see that when Blizzard fails, at least a part of the community fucks them all the way. This took much longer to crack than I anticipated though - so hell, it's about time. | ||
|
dakalro
Romania525 Posts
On March 21 2011 21:47 GrackGyver wrote: Kids just out of high school arguing against LAN because someone told them it wasn't cool in this day and age. Gotta love customers fighting for corporate interest. "yeah screw me harder please ooh" Haha, if only I wasn't HS 14 years too old for HS. LAN was the only thing back then, BNC 10 mbit with line terminators, internet was through dial-up. But now when I have a central server with thousands of players, 99%++ uptime, normalized latency which means neither of the 2 players will have an advantage why would I ever actually need LAN, except for ensuring the extra 0.9% uptime in big tournaments. You would still get the server added latency even in a LAN enabled SC2, Blizzard won't allow different gaming experiences between LAN and battle.net, not for SC2. And you still won't have rock solid uptime, power outages and network collapse can still happen for various reasons (cat bites the wires win). | ||
|
alexhard
Sweden317 Posts
On March 21 2011 21:39 disciple wrote:Just imagine how much money they are losing for each cracked copy that gets used around the world. Pretty much none at all. In fact it's probably earning them quite a lot of money. Professionals and companies generally don't pirate, partly because of serious repercussions if caught (lost income, fines) and partly because they are more heavily dependent on the support services that come with the price. People who pirate are kids and college students who couldn't find $1400 if it meant their life. By using the program and becoming familiar with it, it ensures its continued popularity in the professional world. | ||
|
VoirDire
Sweden1923 Posts
The server would connect to battle.net and authenticate the users etc, but the actual starcraft game itself would be hosted on the server, thus allowing LAN latency. | ||
|
goiflin
Canada1218 Posts
On March 21 2011 22:08 dakalro wrote: Haha, if only I wasn't HS 14 years too old for HS. LAN was the only thing back then, BNC 10 mbit with line terminators, internet was through dial-up. But now when I have a central server with thousands of players, 99%++ uptime, normalized latency which means neither of the 2 players will have an advantage why would I ever actually need LAN, except for ensuring the extra 0.9% uptime in big tournaments. You would still get the server added latency even in a LAN enabled SC2, Blizzard won't allow different gaming experiences between LAN and battle.net, not for SC2. And you still won't have rock solid uptime, power outages and network collapse can still happen for various reasons (cat bites the wires win). We're talking about tournaments, generally. We wouldn't have server added latency, since that is the point of LAN. Sure, a blizzard version of LAN would probably have the delay - but that's why we have the cracked version. And yes, we would have rock solid uptime in comparison to bnet 2.0. A cat biting a wire is pretty far-fetched at a tournament environment. | ||
|
Jayson X
Switzerland2431 Posts
On March 21 2011 21:48 dakalro wrote: Blizzard will not add LAN to the game, they would most likely just send an armored car with a battle.net server on it for tournaments. They'll just change the comm protocol with a better one. And I still don't see any real reason why LAN is needed. Or for that matter why chat channels were needed, esp when they ended up neutered, they're worthless for forming communities, better off staying on IRC/forums. Speak for yourself. It's not our fault that Blizzard is too incompetent to implement chat channels with the same functionality of at least a 10 year old game. Channels helped out a lot in organising and maintaining tournaments & mini-communities. If you're not part of them, that is your loss. There is a whole list of things Blizzard refuses to implement and LAN, maybe not in the stage it is presented in the op, gives a lot of control to the user. Why do I have to buy 3 accounts per server to ladder independently with all 3 races? Tournament organiser invest hundreds of thousands of dollars and still have to play on a system they have no control over whatsoever? Latency as shown once again with the TSL3 is a big issue. The question is could Starcraft 2 be modified to have a similar experience we had with when going from battle.net to iccup/LAN? | ||
|
dakalro
Romania525 Posts
On March 21 2011 22:00 XsebT wrote: Think we're talking about the idea here... It doesn't have to be iccup making this. It nice to see that when Blizzard fails, at least a part of the community fucks them all the way. This took much longer to crack than I anticipated though - so hell, it's about time. http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=20475 This is what happens when someone actually pisses Blizzard off. There will be no, and I mean 0 popular SC2 private servers that will live long enough. KESPA can have a long trial cause they don't need battle.net but when Blizzard says you have to be connected to battle.net and you don't do that, then it's easy :D since you're stealing their code. | ||
|
morimacil
France921 Posts
Oh, and blizzard's supporting us by increasing our ping rates! That was nice of them. I always wanted a massive delay in commands when I play with people on different continents A local area network (LAN) is a computer network that connects computers and devices in a limited geographical area such as home, school, computer laboratory or office building You have a lan cable drawn to a different continent? o.O And yeah, they want full control of the product, and who uses it, when, and where. Its a bit sad that they want/need so much control over it, but then again, its also a bit sad that if they dont have absolutely full control over it, within the hour people will be stealing their software and using it without paying them, as well as using it to make tons of money with no benefit to them. Releasing lan support might be good for the game itself, but considering the fact that it would mean millions of lost sales in hots and lotv, along with tonf of profits lost due to organizations such as kespa using their products to make large amounts of profits without paying anything back, its unlikely to happen. Imagine a supermarket without any cashiers or security, and no cameras, where you just pick up whatever you want to buy, and then put the money yourself in the register. That would in theory be great for the customers, since they would end up getting cheaper products, due to not having to pay for those security measures. But if that were implemented, people would just steal everything, and leave the company with nothing. Sad that the companies need to have so much control over their products, but if they dont, they get riped to shreds by thieves. | ||
|
Synk
United States297 Posts
| ||
|
Gheed
United States972 Posts
On March 21 2011 22:13 morimacil wrote: A local area network (LAN) is a computer network that connects computers and devices in a limited geographical area such as home, school, computer laboratory or office building You have a lan cable drawn to a different continent? o.O If a game has a LAN mode you can use Hamachi or other utility to connect a p2p connection between two computers instead of having to use battle.net as an intermediary. | ||
|
goiflin
Canada1218 Posts
On March 21 2011 22:13 morimacil wrote: A local area network (LAN) is a computer network that connects computers and devices in a limited geographical area such as home, school, computer laboratory or office building You have a lan cable drawn to a different continent? o.O And yeah, they want full control of the product, and who uses it, when, and where. Its a bit sad that they want/need so much control over it, but then again, its also a bit sad that if they dont have absolutely full control over it, within the hour people will be stealing their software and using it without paying them, as well as using it to make tons of money with no benefit to them. Releasing lan support might be good for the game itself, but considering the fact that it would mean millions of lost sales in hots and lotv, along with tonf of profits lost due to organizations such as kespa using their products to make large amounts of profits without paying anything back, its unlikely to happen. Imagine a supermarket without any cashiers or security, and no cameras, where you just pick up whatever you want to buy, and then put the money yourself in the register. That would in theory be great for the customers, since they would end up getting cheaper products, due to not having to pay for those security measures. But if that were implemented, people would just steal everything, and leave the company with nothing. Sad that the companies need to have so much control over their products, but if they dont, they get riped to shreds by thieves. No, but my delay is much higher over sc2 when playing on KR from NA, than iCCup playing koreans from north america. That was the point I was trying to make  Yeah, I know it's a strange dilemma. You have to rape the customers to protect your product from being raped by pirates. But, in general, pirates are going to pirate no matter how much control you assert over your assets. Name one game that hasn't had it's DRM cracked, one game that doesn't have pirate servers. You can't. SC2 is, if this news is true, no exception. Who pays for this, in the end? The pirates who waited 8 months for the game to get LAN cracked, or the paying customers who have no LAN functionality when people who don't even pay for the game get it? Also, there's another whole debate about whether or not most pirates are actually going to buy the game or not, if it's not available for free, which I won't get into, but to say that because a game has been pirated X times means that they lost X sales is silly. On March 21 2011 22:15 Synk wrote: People trying to justify pirating is why the PC gaming market is so barren now. It's no different from stealing plain and simple and every game developer is losing millions of dollars a year to it ( on pc ), which is why so many are sticking to consoles where its much harder to pirate games. There are people here trying to justify piracy? I see a bunch of paying customers who would like the addition of LAN to their game, a functionality that's older than moses. | ||
|
Gheed
United States972 Posts
On March 21 2011 22:15 Synk wrote: People trying to justify pirating is why the PC gaming market is so barren now. It's no different from stealing plain and simple and every game developer is losing millions of dollars a year to it ( on pc ), which is why so many are sticking to consoles where its much harder to pirate games. Nobody is arguing for pirating SC2 in this thead. + Show Spoiler + Also, it's not theft, it's piracy. There is a tangible legal difference, if not a moral one. That you for some reason think it's hard to pirate console games further displays your ignorance on the subject. | ||
|
XsebT
Denmark2980 Posts
On March 21 2011 22:11 dakalro wrote: http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=20475 This is what happens when someone actually pisses Blizzard off. There will be no, and I mean 0 popular SC2 private servers that will live long enough. KESPA can have a long trial cause they don't need battle.net but when Blizzard says you have to be connected to battle.net and you don't do that, then it's easy :D since you're stealing their code. Maybe not as popular as iccup, but I can assure you that there will be private servers. Just because something is illigal doesn't mean people won't do it. Exactly like we see it with WoW private servers (which is certainly losing blizzard way more money than sc2 private servers ever will). | ||
|
Gingerninja
United Kingdom1339 Posts
On March 21 2011 22:15 Synk wrote: People trying to justify pirating is why the PC gaming market is so barren now. It's no different from stealing plain and simple and every game developer is losing millions of dollars a year to it ( on pc ), which is why so many are sticking to consoles where its much harder to pirate games. I know several people who'd call bullshit on that theory immediately. All you need to know is a source for the downloads and the correct codecs to write them to disk. (oh and the correct disk type) Every other game which gets used in a tournament has LAN. It's well known within E-sports that tournaments prove your worth not online where you can cheat, and Lag interferes. LAN offers Lag free gaming without any stupid bullshit server side. I can't fathom why a Player of the games would be against a feature that has been available in games since someone figured out how to implement 2 player. Why would we want Lan? So we can play LAN! I don't give a rats about tunnelling systems and that illegality and rubbish, I want to play against my friends without having to send the signal around europe when they're sitting across the frigging table from me. "Sorry I realise you came to my house with your computer, but I can't play against you from 3 feet away.. because Battle.net / Internet issues. . hmm brood war anyone?" and yes it is pissing my off immensely that console games have started cutting LAN out as well as splitscreen, eventually all multiplayer is going to go through service providers like Steam/Xbox Live / Battle.net and then we don't have any control over the stuff we've purchased at all. Don't like it.. not one bit. | ||
|
David Dark
Poland100 Posts
Because I read the forums and theres so much hate about blizz and talking how they suck and don't care about players but everytime I check bnet theres like over 500.000 people online so why would they give a damn? It's like you meet me on the street you say 'man you fucking suck' and then you put money in my pocket and walk away, how would I feel? Great, I would go and buy some buritos for your cash. The blizzard staff has to be laughing hard when they imagine a sobbing progamer walking to the shop crying to the shopkeeper that he hasn't got lan and then he buy 3 copies of SC2 instead of 1 cuz he has to hide his builds. | ||
|
goiflin
Canada1218 Posts
On March 21 2011 22:33 David Dark wrote: You want something from blizzard? How about the players stop logging to bnet and not playing SC2 for a week? If that doesn't work a month, how about that? Don't buy the heart of the swarm if it doesn't give us lan? Hum? Because I read the forums and theres so much hate about blizz and talking how they suck and don't care about players but everytime I check bnet theres like over 500.000 people online so why would they give a damn? It's like you meet me on the street you say 'man you fucking suck' and then you put money in my pocket and walk away, how would I feel? Great, I would go and buy some buritos for your cash. The blizzard staff has to be laughing hard when they imagine a sobbing progamer walking to the shop crying to the shopkeeper that he hasn't got lan and then he buy 3 copies of SC2 instead of 1 cuz he has to hide his builds. I wouldn't say that people here hate blizzard; I'm sure many of them enjoy SC2. It'd just be nice if we had a LAN functionality, which was taken out because of piracy issues, which apparently has been bypassed. Why not add it in? Do you not like good customer services and products, or something? Are you against the idea that we should actually get MORE functions as future games get released? You're a strange man. | ||
|
GreEny K
Germany7312 Posts
On March 21 2011 15:32 DirtYLOu wrote: They will never put LAN support in SC2. Maybe after few years when the sales won't be that high, and when numbers of players will go down. Thats why im saying give it to KeSPA, and we will have our DREAM SC2. What in the world makes you say that? The game came out without channels, and then they were added in to make the game better. I'm sure Blizzard will keep adding features that will make the game more enjoyable, hopefully multi replay! | ||
|
Gheed
United States972 Posts
On March 21 2011 22:33 David Dark wrote: You want something from blizzard? How about the players stop logging to bnet and not playing SC2 for a week? If that doesn't work a month, how about that? Don't buy the heart of the swarm if it doesn't give us lan? Hum? Because I read the forums and theres so much hate about blizz and talking how they suck and don't care about players but everytime I check bnet theres like over 500.000 people online so why would they give a damn? It's like you meet me on the street you say 'man you fucking suck' and then you put money in my pocket and walk away, how would I feel? Great, I would go and buy some buritos for your cash. The blizzard staff has to be laughing hard when they imagine a sobbing progamer walking to the shop crying to the shopkeeper that he hasn't got lan and then he buy 3 copies of SC2 instead of 1 cuz he has to hide his builds. This argument is as asinine as it is old. Obviously desire for LAN is a niche concern; obviously Blizzard can just go tell everyone who wants LAN to piss off and it wouldn't affect their sales. But, why? Why would we give up on something we like and want to be better? We're all here because we like Blizzard's game(s); why would we not want them to improve them? As an aside, the number of people on battle.net includes WoW, whose playerbase far and away eclipses Starcraft 2's at any given moment. | ||
|
karpo
Sweden1998 Posts
On March 21 2011 22:38 goiflin wrote: I wouldn't say that people here hate blizzard; I'm sure many of them enjoy SC2. It'd just be nice if we had a LAN functionality, which was taken out because of piracy issues, which apparently has been bypassed. Why not add it in? Do you not like good customer services and products, or something? Are you against the idea that we should actually get MORE functions as future games get released? You're a strange man. LAN is also a problem due to the Kespa vs blizzard issue. Blizzard wants control over what their IP is being used for, something that is hard and requires lots of legal work. Preventing lan and making games run over battle.net makes sure they have control over their creation. | ||
| ||
