| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
HeIios
Sweden2523 Posts
I have been to a lot of lans without internet. Then you have to choose, be in a smaller LAN with close friends and play SC2 with an internet connection. or Be in a huge LAN with youngsters running around screaming about headshots and camping while you play other games offline. Personally it's easy for me to choose -> + Show Spoiler + You can do both. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On June 14 2010 06:20 PanzerDragoon wrote: So that should put an end to LAN crybabying, because tournaments are the only place where LAN is a true necessity. roflmao ... so only the "top end" is important and the bottom isnt? | ||
|
fiesta
United States6 Posts
Luckily you're all wrong, because thanks to the hard work of faceless hackers, I can have my cake and eat it too! I'm actually pretty excited for the hardcore community that is going to flock to the first spoofed server/vpn-for-hacked-clients. No silly lag spikes, no servers down, no worries! e: I don't give a rip about supporting blizzard and neither should you. If you're posting here, you are firmly in the minority of blizzard's market share. So many people are going to buy this game - if you choose not to grab LAN functionality for yourself, out of some misplaced sense of morality, you're a fool  | ||
|
Acies
Australia196 Posts
On June 14 2010 19:29 HeIios wrote: Then you have to choose, be in a smaller LAN with close friends and play SC2 with an internet connection. or Be in a huge LAN with youngsters running around screaming about headshots and camping while you play other games offline. Personally it's easy for me to choose -> + Show Spoiler + You can do both. The whole point is that without lan function you can't do both. Don't tell me I should just play games I am far less interested in than SC2. Blizzard's attitude heres is absurd; Bnet 2 is so awesome I should play counterstrike instead because they left out a fundamental feature?!? Fortunately this news shows Blizzard is starting to see reason, soon they may drop their naive view that they can somehow beat the pirates and that any buys their bnet2 is awesome story. | ||
|
Polis
Poland1292 Posts
On June 14 2010 15:41 Half wrote: Skype Premium Edition. Or even WoW lol, private servers kind of suck. You can have pirated Starcraft 2 with everything broken and 300 ms. WOW is mmorpg, comparing they servers to BN is ridiculous, pirated servers will be as broken as iCCup is, latency depends on the connection between players SC2 is p2p. On June 14 2010 15:27 Half wrote: Look. It isn't open distribution, its for tourney organizers only. How much do you think they're charging OSL for this? 100,000$? lol. My guess is they just give it for a registration fee (to ensure its serious, and the prlly wont lose sleep over the money lol) for approved tournaments. It doesn't even specify pricing, if any. Calm down kids. Yes blizzard did something good at least, it would be really horrid if non professional players could play with LAN latency. No wait wtf are you talking about? If not money then what is the reason? Pirates will have this copy, and they can crack it, so what difference does it make for piracy? On June 14 2010 15:27 Half wrote:btw guys: If they were looking for shot term success, they wouldn't be investing into Esports. Its unlikely blizzard will see any serious profits from the sectors until after serious investment. It doesn't look like they plan to invest anything in esports so what are you talking about? Taking fees is investing? On June 14 2010 09:07 xtfftc wrote: If this turns out to be true, how would Activision expect us to believe that the reason behind not including LAN is that "that functionality's not there"? On June 14 2010 15:27 Half wrote:Nobody said this lol. Somebody from Blizzard had said that, that this feature is not needed, and it would take development time. | ||
|
SpaceChick
173 Posts
On June 14 2010 14:39 xBillehx wrote: So just a few days ago the main complaint for anti-Blizzard people was that they're doing nothing to support esports at all. Now that theres a rumor they're giving special attention to esports like people wanted, all the anti-Blizzard people are back to the no LAN for themselves thing. Quite funny really. It's tl.net so what do you expect :p? | ||
|
Polis
Poland1292 Posts
Special attention for esports = removing features from non professional copies, that should be praised? Blizzard defenders are truly ridiculous. | ||
|
whatthemate
Australia51 Posts
Its no longer a rumour. What if lags occurs during a live broadcasted tournament on GOM tv?? What happens if the lag box pops up during the game? hundreds of thousands of audiences will be disappointed. GOMTv has to make the tv program run smoothly without internet connection problems to achieve high ratings. Internet connection issues are battle.net2.0's side, so it will be blizzard's fault if their servers are unreliable. It will be blizzard's liability if anything goes wrong, in fact they can be sued if their servers go down, especially when they are live broadcasting tourneys. Gom tv has a strong argument, and as stated explicity in the contract..... Blizzard does not want to be liable for any interruptions hence they will be providing a special lan edition for tournament organisers. | ||
|
Rodiel
France573 Posts
))))) TLO will come inside a boeing like FlashFor the starcraft professional edition with lan i dont trust, it will be too easy to hack it or it must be very minor | ||
|
jamesr12
United States1549 Posts
On June 14 2010 18:36 Kolossus wrote: Oh, aren't you presumptuous thinking you know the sexual preferences and fetishes of blizzards "tournament staff". No they would tell him theres a 10,000 dollar fee to have a blizz representive at your tournament | ||
|
Muey
Finland149 Posts
On June 14 2010 10:47 Zanez.smarty wrote: lol... if you think SCBW was not pirated... wow, I guess you are beyond help. There was a pretty big incentive to buy it though, since you couldn't play multiplayer without a legit CD-key, and easy IP tunneling services like Hamachi didn't exist back 10 years ago, so if you wanted to play over the internet with your friends you were pretty much forced to buy it. As for LAN, well, there was the spawn version of the game you could install... | ||
|
Batch
Sweden692 Posts
On June 14 2010 18:50 Acies wrote: I have been to a lot of lans without internet. I've also been to lans with internet that is enough to support 400 odd people logging into steam and msn etc but can not possibly handle playing games via the net. I have never been to a lan that could support 400+ people playing games exclusively via the internet with a decent ping and neither have you. I think you overestimate the bandwidth and hardware needed to have 400 players playing online at the same time. My guess is that the game uses a maximum of 5-10 kB/s (40-80 kb/s) which means that a 10Mb/10Mb connecion would be enough to support over 100 players. Getting such a connection for a LAN shouldn't be that hard. I have a 100Mb/100Mb connection for which I pay about $50/month. | ||
|
Daedie
Belgium160 Posts
| ||
|
OpRaider
United States307 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 76781
101 Posts
| ||
|
DuncanIdaho
United States465 Posts
I'm just saying I doubt a leaked pro-version is what it will take to get the LAN into the underground. But I'm a good boy, I eat my vegetables, and all that goodness, truth, and apple pie, I'm just conjecturing, of course.  | ||
|
Kletus
Canada580 Posts
I am so excited for the end of the month. Hopefully all these rumors prove to be true! | ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
On June 14 2010 18:50 thedeadhaji wrote: $10 says the professional edition will get leaked and cracked Indeed, then the DRM dilemma of the pirated game being superior to the paying customer's game will happen once again. Will developers never learn that you can't stop piracy by making the customer own something inferior to what the people that don't pay use. Sad world we live in It seems humanity will forever lack the fundamental concept that is common sense. One can almost hope these rumours are false but judging by past actions I doubt it. | ||
|
Acies
Australia196 Posts
On June 14 2010 22:21 Batch wrote: I think you overestimate the bandwidth and hardware needed to have 400 players playing online at the same time. My guess is that the game uses a maximum of 5-10 kB/s (40-80 kb/s) which means that a 10Mb/10Mb connecion would be enough to support over 100 players. Getting such a connection for a LAN shouldn't be that hard. I have a 100Mb/100Mb connection for which I pay about $50/month. I sometimes get lag with 1.5MB/s (around 150kb/s). You forget that not all countries are blessed with high population densities with strong internet infrastructure and located relatively close to the nearest BNet server. A 100Mb/100Mb is not laughably cheap here, nor is it simple to obtain anywhere you want. LANs of large sizes are usually hosted in city halls, gymnasiums and community centres which usually host events that do not require internet and as such are not built with the location of the nearest internet exchange in mind or have fibreoptic cables installed. Maybe in Sweden where you have dreamhack such a setup might be trivial but it is not so in countries whose telecommunications budgets go into achieving coverage of large areas rather than high quality in dense populations. I also doubt that even Sweden is going to be able to support it's lans of 11,000 to play games online simultaneously. It just boggles the mind that anyone can consider it sane to transfer game data 12,000 km across oceans rather than 5m over a local network. All for some misguided attempt to thwart piracy that has time and time again proved only to bolster it. | ||
|
Boonbag
France3318 Posts
just, every single pro gamer you see now will turn into a fucking machine in sc2 there will be no way to catch up | ||
| ||
|
|
PiGosaur Cup
WardiTV Invitational
The PondCast
OSC
OSC
All Star Teams
INnoVation vs soO
sOs vs Scarlett
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
All Star Teams
MMA vs DongRaeGu
Rogue vs Oliveira
Sparkling Tuna Cup
OSC
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
