|
Poll: Has Bnet 2.0 done a sufficient job of replacing LAN?No (1139) 90% Yes (121) 10% 1260 total votes Your vote: Has Bnet 2.0 done a sufficient job of replacing LAN? (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
Like everyone, I was skeptical when Blizzard said they would remove LAN from SC2. I understood that it was to deter pirating and to promote what Bnet 2.0 was capable of, so I remained optimistic.
However, today my friends and I decided to get together to play some SC2. Unfortunately, the router kept disconnecting random people in the middle of games when we tried to play. Frustrated, we just went back to brood war and played LAN.
It's not a matter of the router, but StarCraft 2 seems to cause disconnect issues when all four of us try to play it at once on one connection.
I don't get how Bnet 2.0 is suppose to replace LAN if problems like this will arise for some people who just want to get together and play. Now that the beta's out, has anyone else had problems with trying to get together to faux-LAN? Or is it just a small number of people with the issue?
I just need it to run sufficiently, I'm not asking for anything else but me and my friends being capable of setting up computers next to each other and play without worrying about disconnect issues.
EDIT: I am aware that it is still in beta, but I am still interested to know if Bnet 2.0 at the moment has sufficient support for this issue.
Also, it may be an issue with the router. However, consider how many people have enough knowledge to fix issues with their router. No matter who you are, it's always a pain to diagnose and fix router problems when you just want to play some games.
|
I think the poll results are quite unanimous at this point.
|
no lan seriously sucks, i only played bw on lan against friends and even though we sucked we had good fun...
|
Routed p2p coupled with native latency is terrible.
I don't care if I have to be logged into b.net as long as I can play with 0 latency if my opponent is in the same house.
I think this would all be solved if custom games were not routed and the latency between the two computers was tested and then a suitable latency was selected. On a ladder route the signal to b.net servers if you want. I don't care. You need ways to prevent hacks and to get game data for balancing or whatever. But in custom I don't see the need. Hell make it a toggle that defaults to on...
For example If I am in a custom game with people all in my house the latency would be 0 so the game would not include any built in latency. If I am playing with people in my state then the game would perform a maybe 5 pings between each player then set the native latency to maybe 30 higher than that to help with spikes. This would mean I can play with my friends at around 100 latency instead of 250.
|
I thought the final game was supposed to have an offline mode similar to a LAN that was accessible only after you validated though b.net
|
On May 02 2010 15:31 DeCoup wrote:
Routed p2p coupled with native latency is terrible.
I don't care if I have to be logged into b.net as long as I can play with 0 latency if my opponent is in the same house.
I think this would all be solved if custom games were not routed and the latency between the two computers was tested and then a suitable latency was selected. On a ladder route the signal to b.net servers if you want. I don't care. You need ways to prevent hacks and to get game data for balancing or whatever. But in custom I don't see the need. Hell make it a toggle that defaults to on...
For example If I am in a custom game with people all in my house the latency would be 0 so the game would not include any built in latency. If I am playing with people in my state then the game would perform a maybe 5 pings between each player then set the native latency to maybe 30 higher than that to help with spikes. This would mean I can play with my friends at around 100 latency instead of 250.
I think all games should be hosted by bnet....
we dont need more drop programs and maphacks for sc2 dota and other custom games...if u want lan latency stick with iccup and sc1.
Give blizzard a chance to really flesh bnet 2,0 out first...then if you dont like it, dont play sc2?
$0.02, I dont intend to sound like a troll flamer...sorry if it comes across like that.
|
Because 10 years later, most of us who have small LANs have an internet connection that can handle all the people there.
|
Not even close. It's all a money grab.
|
On May 02 2010 15:34 Ai52487963 wrote:
I thought the final game was supposed to have an offline mode similar to a LAN that was accessible only after you validated though b.net
this was just speculation by people who think blizzard actually cares enough to do that
how could ANYONE vote yes on this poll rofl
as someone who LANs with BW almost every week, it TOTALLY SUCKS that there's no LAN 
single worst part about SC2, even worse than zerg being boring
|
On May 02 2010 15:42 Ideas wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2010 15:34 Ai52487963 wrote:
I thought the final game was supposed to have an offline mode similar to a LAN that was accessible only after you validated though b.net this was just speculation by people who think blizzard actually cares enough to do that how could ANYONE vote yes on this poll rofl as someone who LANs with BW almost every week, it TOTALLY SUCKS that there's no LAN single worst part about SC2, even worse than zerg being boring
Bring a switch? Problem solved? When I LANed SC1, very few of us had broadband. Times have changed?
|
BN 2.0 = misery.
Watching that starswar tournament in China was so much torture that one would want to kill himself.
|
On May 02 2010 15:35 Kegs.aus wrote:
I think all games should be hosted by bnet....
we dont need more drop programs and maphacks for sc2 dota and other custom games...if u want lan latency stick with iccup and sc1.
Give blizzard a chance to really flesh bnet 2,0 out first...then if you dont like it, dont play sc2?
$0.02, I dont intend to sound like a troll flamer...sorry if it comes across like that.
What do drop programs and maphacks, which were problems with Battle.net, have to do with LAN? The LAN option, in this context, refers to being able to play custom games without going through Battle.net. It is of course understood that Ladder will remain a Battle.net only feature.
"If you don't like it, don't play SC 2." A valid option as always, but not that helpful in a thread about whether LAN should have been implemented, from the perspective of us players.
|
well on the bright side i can 2v2 with my roommate
|
Just putting this out there, but have you considered playing SC2 hotseat? Disconnect in that situation seems pretty unlikely.
|
What I want to know is what are your supposed to do when there is finals for a 20k tournament and servers shut down.
|
On May 02 2010 15:48 iloahz wrote:
BN 2.0 = misery.
Watching that starswar tournament in China was so much torture that one would want to kill himself.
sadly, this. I wish blizzard would show that video in the morning meeting to their product director and just show him how humiliating their work is.
|
On May 02 2010 15:54 CagedMind wrote:
What I want to know is what are your supposed to do when there is finals for a 20k tournament and servers shut down.
You can't do anything. Blizzard has stated that they want to centralize eSports. Part of this is having all tournaments depend on Battle.net 2.0.
|
I think Bnet 2 will be just fine once they get a channel system up and running. Its retarded trying to host a tourny or run a event on bnet 2 at the moment. I also dont really notice much latancy on bnet, but maybe thats just me. So I think once we get channels i won't miss LAN at all.
|
On May 02 2010 15:58 InToTheWannaB wrote:
I think Bnet 2 will be just fine once they get a channel system up and running. Its retarded trying to host a tourny or run a event on bnet 2 at the moment. I also dont really notice much latancy on bnet, but maybe thats just me. So I think once we get channels i won't miss LAN at all.
There will be no channels, this is confirmed
|
On May 02 2010 16:00 Zed03 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2010 15:58 InToTheWannaB wrote:
I think Bnet 2 will be just fine once they get a channel system up and running. Its retarded trying to host a tourny or run a event on bnet 2 at the moment. I also dont really notice much latancy on bnet, but maybe thats just me. So I think once we get channels i won't miss LAN at all. There will be no channels, this is confirmed
What? Where's the source of this? Last time I heard they are present at release.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
