|
On June 30 2009 01:01 Ingenol wrote:
Really disappointed about the weakness of Zerg. This is something that I felt was also the case in the Blizzcon 2008 build.
I for one would like to see a Blizzard beta strategy where they make tons of changes very quickly, then reverse them if necessary. In the past they have been extremely reticent to undo any changes, even if something was clearly nerfed/buffed too much. I suppose this is considerably more work on their part, particularly in terms of bug testing.
dont worry alot about the balencing atm. it will get enhanced (not perfect but a vast improvement) during beta (cant wait!!)
|
On June 30 2009 00:55 wtfhi2u wrote:
Really Kennigit, with all due respect, how does Bnet 2.0 (connecting to a service on the internets) save / replace a LAN option? Please? I really don't see how the two are related, or how one can replace the other.
Because they'll obviously make it possible to still have the equivalent of LAN games, except requiring you to log in to b.net first?
Anyone who actually thinks Blizzard isn't going to make it possible to play with someone on network latency is woefully ignorant.
And the whole issue with it causing people to drop from games is completely false. The only times that happens on battle.net is in ladder games that are hosted on battle.net. Active custom games continue playing even when battle.net crashes, since they're not hosted by b.net. I'm sure b.net 2's LAN "replacement" will be the same way.
Honestly I think Rob Pardo just didn't choose his words very well.
|
I think Blizz used the 1 week NDA because they wanted all the sites to be able to come up with a single article including all the game details. Maybe they thought that PR would be disrupted if all community was tweeting the new reveals and the hype will dye before the in depth articles are completed.
Also, "there is no LAN because of some new Bnet features" could mean there is a (scarce) possibility the game could act as a game server (a pseudo Bnet server) that would allow a more organized ladder system in a LAN environment. Anyway this is what I hope for, because LAN or no LAN, there will always be alternate Bnet servers (PGTour or ICCUP style) and piracy will still thrive.
|
|
|
the whole reason BW took off in korea and china (the first two countries to really support BW with a unified communities) was because of LAN connectivity which allowed net cafes to have the game on site. you can go to one of these cafes, load the game, and play with friends or connect to battlnet or garena, hamchi, etc.
but NOW with Activlizzard in control
You can't play SC2 without buying the game, getting a CD, and signing up for BATTLE.NET.
This is all about the benjamins gentlemen.
NO LAN MEANS YOU HAVE TO BUY TO PLAY. PERIOD.
no buy, no cd key, no battlenet account, no sc2 4 u
|
dude... you dont get it.
i applaud your efforts.. but seeriously. they know exactly what they are doing. they do not want SC2 to be played anywhere except battle.net. not on garena, not on iccup, not on hamachi, not in the privacy of your home offline with pals on LAN... nowhere but under the watchful eye of the Activlizzard. this is all by design. its not like the model of the DT that is open to fan input... no LAN is by design and frankly quite repulsive.
|
United States20667 Posts
SCLegacy is frankly incorrect in their portrayal of events. Kim went 3-0 against Cooper fairly handily.
|
On June 30 2009 01:13 omninmo wrote:dude... you dont get it.
It's not my petition. The link was in the closed thread about "no lan in SC2".
It will not make a difference. But what else should we do?
|
TL - thanks for the information as always.
Just a quick question, has there been any hints on sc2's system requirements? I will most likely be buying a new machine for this and want to keep specs in mind.
|
On June 30 2009 01:12 omninmo wrote:
NO LAN MEANS YOU HAVE TO BUY TO PLAY. PERIOD.
Blizzard wants people to buy their game. More at 11!
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
On June 30 2009 01:16 rally_point wrote:
TL - thanks for the information as always.
Just a quick question, has there been any hints on sc2's system requirements? I will most likely be buying a new machine for this and want to keep specs in mind.
All that's really been said right now is that it will be optimized for dual core and that you will need at least a Pixel Shader 2.0 compliant video card.
|
|
|
Petitiononline + Show Spoiler +
On a more serious note I agree that not haveing LAN-play included is a bad thing, it doesn't make much sense to go in reverse in terms of "technology". Also when a big and respected developer like Blizzard ditches LAN-features other developers might think it's OK for them to do so too and now not haveing LAN in your games is the standard instead of always haveing it like it was up until now.
|
On June 30 2009 01:15 I3oxerfan wrote:It's not my petition. The link was in the closed thread about "no lan in SC2". It will not make a difference. But what else should we do?
there is nothing to be done.. that is why they can do it. because even though they are bending you over and entering your ass without grease... you are gonna take it. because its sc2...
its SC2. "hell its about time...to rape all the fans, take their money three times, and cut out any potential ESPORTS competition". they learned from iccup and garena (which was ripped off from a chinese server called VS). how do you cut out the competition? cut out LAN. simple.
|
They can have my $150 now if SC2 provides even 1/10th the entertainment in terms of raw minutes that SC (even without BW) did.
"hell its about time...to rape all the fans, take their money three times, and cut out any potential ESPORTS competition"
i'll take my surprise sex consensual-style, thanks
|
United States20667 Posts
Oh yeah neither Browder nor Karune has any idea about system requirements.
Didn't notice any Hellion abilities, though I might not have been looking hard enough.
|
United States20667 Posts
Re: the corruptor, it's a very good air-to-air combat unit. That being said, it's still definitely more in the devourer role - good against other combat units, but nobody will conceivably use them to prevent drops and such.
|
|
|
One more thing about LAN if Bnet will close you will never be able to play SC2 in mp, but SC will work forever, seems unlikely now but you can't be sure, plus other companies do similar things with they online activation, and Blizz will just give them more creditability you can play all those great old games from companies that were on top in the past, but did anyway bankrupt. Also there is simply a possibility that Bnet 2 will not be the best possible server, adn somebody else could for example make better antihack program.
The point is that they introduce artificial inconvenience, and customers should not just accept it or else things will steadily get worse. Let be serious about piracy problem Blizzard is likely to sell SC2 greatly with LAN or without it, so what is the problem other then they greed? I had buy almost every blizzard game like a rabid fanboy, but it can change becouse of moves like that. (only didn't buy those that I was not interested in at all)
|
This just looks like brood war minus some units, plus some new units, plus a face lift. 10 years later, and Blizzard is going to release a sequel that is marginally different from its predecessor. I hope this turns out well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
