EPTNo LAN for SC2, it's confirmed - Page 14
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
| ||
|
e4e5nf3
Canada599 Posts
| ||
LuDwig-
Italy1143 Posts
| ||
|
Polis
Poland1292 Posts
As for legality: 1)spawn install are legal. 2)Just becouse something is not legal it don't automatically make it bad. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On June 30 2009 15:05 e4e5nf3 wrote: I'm hoping Blizz is just holding off lan implementation until one or both of the expansions is released. Perhaps they're calculating that since the game won't be fully balanced anyhow until all the expansions come out, it should be alright to hold off lan implementation. The SC2 esport scene won't be in full swing until the game is complete anyhow. Plus it gives people more incentive to buy the expansions. At least I'm hoping this is the case. That's still a dumb move. Leave out a key part of countless games' multiplayer aspect just to put it in an expansion? I can't think of many ways that would be more greedy and money-grubbingly selfish than that. If they did that, I would lose ALL respect I had for Blizzard. | ||
|
00Zarathustra
Bolivia419 Posts
On June 30 2009 15:36 Polis wrote: Ok why are you people so concerned about piracy? Every blizzard game was a big commercial success, having spawn installation didn't stop SC from being one. Why do you defend greed that hurt customers? It would be understandable if Blizzard games were not so popular, but that is not the case SC2 would sell great even with spawn installation. If they are selfish, they why I should be selfless towards them, and support lower standards that they offer now? By doing so you are promoting changes that are bad for you, think about it. This is what we are really talking about. Let Blizzard worry about the pirates. We are COSTUMERS!!!!!!! So the ones defending blizzard are the "rich costumers" or at least wealthy enough to have internet connection wherever they go. What they don't realize is that having the LAN option takes nothing from them. It the same with or without LAN. So including it wont hurt them. Why do you waste your time talking about pirates and sales? Are you Blizzard executives? No ur not. Ur costumer like the rest of us. So STFU. Then there are the other type of costumers: The "third world - poor costumers" including me. This are the ones that should be complaining. Why? Because taking the LAN of the game, is taking the only multiplayer option we have. "Get an internet connection" we don't have the money to pay even for 512kbps connection. Most of the cybercafe (where everyone plays SC here) have 2 separated rooms. 1 with internet and one without it. This is so the non playing ppl can have available machines for net surfing, while the gamers can play LAN with no trouble. Why not putting internet on every machine? Expenses. As i said is really expensive to have big internet connections here. So the internet is used for really important matters, not games. So imagine i listen to you ppl saying to get an internet connection. I go and talk to the cybercafe owner to get an internet connection to be able to play a game. + 1) He wont pay additional 100$us (more than the average paycheck here) so we can play a LAN game. I mean why would he? there are tons of games you just have to click a button to play LAN. why should he pay to do this? Should his kinds miss their private school so we can play SC2? Or should LAN be available with a single click like it always been? 2)He doesn't give a **** if SC2 is the most epic game ever!!! He has a family to feed. So its just a game to him. He already has to make the investment in the game itself. i repeat "there are tons of games you just have to click a button to play LAN. why should he pay to do this?" So pre-answering you possible responses: Why not share the internet with the internet only room? u just need to log in to bnet and then you are not using the bandwidth anymore? Well here 1 of every 1000 ppl has home internet the rest of us just use a cybercafe. That includes but not limits to: business mails, relatives mail, corp. mails. internet homework, internet studies, internet learning, internet business, etc. So the machines are restricted to that use. Because you know gamers are hardcore and will use the Pc for hours leaving a lot of unfinished business from ppl that really need it. So games are banned from those pcs no matter what. So this is my friend's case and mine. At least in Bolivia that is the rule not the exception. There are a lot of other cases, a lot of other countrys, a lot of other places in the world where internet is not an option. IT JUST IS NOT AN OPTION. So to you ppl that are lucky enough to have easy access to internet: STOP defending a cause that is not yours. This LAN problem is not a problem to you, so don't flame. This LAN problem is a problem to us, so let us complain!!!!!! So resuming: No LAN = maybe good for Blizzard - Good for "you" - Bad for "us" LAN = Not bad for Blizzard (will sell millions anyway) - Good for "you" - Good for "us" Key: "you" = "rich consumer/easy internet access" ; "us" = "poor consumer/limited or no internet access" I hope you understand "us" know. And to the ones that do thx. P.S.: to the guy that said that its 2009. Come on!!!! We are in the middle of a world crisis like somebody already said. Get out of your little perfect tiny world. Its harder for us to get internet today than it was 2 years ago. And the ones that had it (like me), couldn't keep it. So...... LET US COMPLAIN | ||
|
Boonbag
France3318 Posts
competitive lan game without any lan support win | ||
|
despite
Bulgaria105 Posts
wait wut? EDIT: On June 30 2009 17:06 Aurious wrote: Solution: allow the download like wow activate CD-Key per account like wow problem fixed...no? Dude not everyone here has played wow, you can try to explain this a little bit. | ||
|
Aurious
Canada1772 Posts
| ||
|
lokiM
United States3407 Posts
| ||
|
georgir
Bulgaria253 Posts
On June 30 2009 16:33 oSS-Zarathustra wrote: We are COSTUMERS!!!!!!! Yeah, but my costume is at the cleaner's. | ||
|
PH
United States6173 Posts
What about those of us with less-than-great internet connections? I don't get consistently good connections through bnet...but VPNs get me decent games...not to mention being able to play at home offline is a big plus. This is fucking stupid...this is just a huge fucking DRM thing, and it fucking sucks ass. | ||
|
CubEdIn
Romania5359 Posts
| ||
|
jtype
England2167 Posts
Have some faith in the guys that made SC1. | ||
|
Teh_Arbitur
Sweden60 Posts
| ||
|
isleyofthenorth
Austria894 Posts
| ||
|
Faoladh
Australia1 Post
To be honest I hadn't even contemplated how this could effect people in considerably less fortunate countries, but I find it quite disenchanting that Blizzard would make a policy decision that could so jeopardise the playing experience of many fans. I know I'm being quite pessimistic reading "We will not be supporting LAN" as all information will be passed through battle.net-2, but really if local network play was to be supported, I'm personally confident that it would be advertised. I've always been punished for playing overseas competitors due to the very substandard internet in Oz. But to be punished whilst playing personal friends in the same building is a bit much. What's really pissing me off is the fact that I will still buy the game because this doesn't effect my home play. I've only ever played LAN at my house once. This effects my ability to duck into a netcafe and play a fun lag free 30 minute game before a movie or after uni with friends. No matter how improved bnet2 is over the original there are always going to be errors on my end of the connection slowing it down. I'm not even getting the really short end of the stick here, it's more midrange. So I just can't help but feel for those who this decision will really effect in an extremely negative manner. | ||
|
PlutoNZ
New Zealand410 Posts
On June 30 2009 20:06 Faoladh wrote: I just can't help but feel for oSS-Zarathustra. I know my situation is nowhere near as bad as his, but I live in a country where I suffer at labsolute best 300ms latency connecting to any US server. It's not much, but it is enough to make macro difficult, especially as things get hairy. The delay can mean the difference all too often between hitting a mine or not. (I know they've been removed.) Now if I want to play a friend at a netcafe, we are both going to get punished through lag on two computers separated by only 1 or 2 metres of physical space. To be honest I hadn't even contemplated how this could effect people in considerably less fortunate countries, but I find it quite disenchanting that Blizzard would make a policy decision that could so jeopardise the playing experience of many fans. I know I'm being quite pessimistic reading "We will not be supporting LAN" as all information will be passed through battle.net-2, but really if local network play was to be supported, I'm personally confident that it would be advertised. I've always been punished for playing overseas competitors due to the very substandard internet in Oz. But to be punished whilst playing personal friends in the same building is a bit much. What's really pissing me off is the fact that I will still buy the game because this doesn't effect my home play. I've only ever played LAN at my house once. This effects my ability to duck into a netcafe and play a fun lag free 30 minute game before a movie or after uni with friends. No matter how improved bnet2 is over the original there are always going to be errors on my end of the connection slowing it down. I'm not even getting the really short end of the stick here, it's more midrange. So I just can't help but feel for those who this decision will really effect in an extremely negative manner. You will be able to play on LAN. You just have to connect to Battle.net first. So if your on the same network as your friends, you will be able to play with no lag. | ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
On June 30 2009 07:28 floor exercise wrote: No LAN is really disappointing and will kill small tournaments and lanparties. I didn't think Blizzard was the kind of company that would intentionally cut things out of their game just to potentially make a few extra bucks when they know it will negatively impact the community. If you don't live in a third world country you have internet on your LAN's | ||
|
despite
Bulgaria105 Posts
On June 30 2009 20:12 SearingShadow wrote: You will be able to play on LAN. You just have to connect to Battle.net first. So if your on the same network as your friends, you will be able to play with no lag. I would really like to see your source on the matter if that's not a problem. Or are you just making conclusions based on previous posts in this thread? All I have read about the differences between bnet1 i bnet2 is the option to make money transactions in order to make tournaments or set up leagues. If that's all about it I'll just give this game a good laugh and I'm not the only one. EDIT: I just read that in the other thread about the two developers. - In the old Battle.net, it was P2P (Peer-2-peer). Is this different in Battle.net 2.0? (T/N: Old Battle.net forced users to connect to each other once in a game, that's why you can get disconnected from Battle.net but still be able to play) ▲ Dustin: It will be similar to Warcraft 3's router format. Gamers will be using Battle.net to play, so we will be able to check what the gamers are doing (i.e: keep track of who's abusing stats, hacking, etc). Is it just me or sending information to the battle.net server causes delay? | ||
| ||
