I believe he was trying to say that the reason BW was pirated, was not because it had lan functionality, but because it was easier due to a lack of online authentication and other features. Although his grammar isn't great, try to understand the post before you lash out.

dew

United States59 Posts

June 14 2010 01:57 GMT

#164

Every game is pirated. Brood War wasn't pirated to any noteworthy level, unless you count iCCup, even though 99% of the players on iCCup paid for the game.

All Blizzard has to do to prevent noteworthy amounts of piracy is create an environment that the playerbase actually wants to play on, as opposed to an environment (which lacks in comparison to the environment from 7-12 years ago) the players are forced to play on if they want to play at all.

Blizzard is asking for piracy when they tell you you can't play LAN without a one-time Professional license and Blizzard supervision. Blizzard is asking for piracy when they tell you to buy 5 copies of the game to play in international markets. Blizzard is asking for piracy when a LAN crack, IRC channel, and VPN would be a more reliable method of organizing a small tournament than Battle.net servers, which only work 85% of the time in the first place.

The part of Blizzard that created StarCraft II deserve our money. The part of Blizzard that created Battle.net "2.0" deserve their annual salaries without any bonuses. The part of Activision that took Battle.net 1.0 features away from us deserve to have their bottom line hit. Hard. A shame it won't work out like that.

DEVIANT

New Zealand30 Posts

June 14 2010 02:00 GMT

#165

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.

ummm... no.

Maybe where you live, you get nice latency, but here we get around 400ms pings. It's highly common to get a pause in every game due to someone lagging the game, in 1v1- try 4 player or more and things get very sketchy.

And the term LAN itself hints at one place I'd like to play with LAN level latency.

Getting a bunch of friends over for beers, pizza, and videogames is a great way to have a very low cost weekend night. We kind of gave up on Steam games, because the LAN feature requires online authentication. Now I see SC2 going the same way. Once you kill it as a LAN game, you lose a large part of the community, and potential growth for the future of the franchise with it.

I would never have purchased Dawn of War if we hadn't made it a staple of our LANs. We only did THAT because there were so many races, and so many expansions, it was always new for half the people there.

Liquid`Jinro

Sweden33719 Posts

June 14 2010 02:12 GMT

#166

On June 14 2010 10:47 Zanez.smarty wrote:

Show nested quote +

lol... if you think SCBW was not pirated... wow, I guess you are beyond help.

He's saying LAN wasn't the reason it was pirated...

You realize there are dozens of private Sc1 servers?

Red Alert

United States119 Posts

June 14 2010 02:39 GMT

#167

On June 14 2010 10:36 artanis2 wrote:
The people that blame pirates for lack of LAN have a pretty hardcore case of Stockholm syndrome.

The original starcraft was not pirated because it had lan. It may have been easier to pirate because it never verified purchase online but that is something they could have rectified without removing the feature completely.

Needless to say, "pirates" (and people making legal modifications to their purchased software) will be playing LAN eventually and everyone sitting in their ivory towers will not.

the point of no lan is to make the pirated game totally dysfunctional. Without even the basic structure for LAN play built in, and no way to authenticate with the b.net servers, it is restricted to single player and multiplayer vs the AI. LAN lets people pirate the game and still play with other people.

xtfftc

United Kingdom2343 Posts

June 14 2010 02:44 GMT

#168

The point of no LAN is to force platforms like Garena out of business, because a lot of people would favour using it instead of Battle.net because it drastically reduces the latency.

artanis2

United States732 Posts

June 14 2010 02:50 GMT

#169

On June 14 2010 11:39 Red Alert wrote:
the point of no lan is to make the pirated game totally dysfunctional. Without even the basic structure for LAN play built in, and no way to authenticate with the b.net servers, it is restricted to single player and multiplayer vs the AI. LAN lets people pirate the game and still play with other people.

Yes but in the end, pirates will have a workaround, and paying customers will be without a feature that they had previously.

Tankbusta

United States109 Posts

June 14 2010 03:01 GMT

#170

This isn't very good news.

We knew they would have to include LAN for their tournaments to succeed, but only lan for these professional players? Really?

And I'm not sure how well this helps pirates for making a LAN-capable version. One would of come out regardless, and depending how this new system works, it might just be easier to make a custom one.

Best situation I can see is if after the first few months of SC2 blizzard releases is a patch allowing all clients to "autheticate" their copy and gain LAN functionality. Otherwise for LAN parties you might as well use the stolen one.

goswser

United States3548 Posts

June 14 2010 03:03 GMT

#171

This makes me hungry for info on how international prelims will be run, would I, for example, be able to participate in international prelims?

KiF1rE

United States964 Posts

June 14 2010 03:06 GMT

#172

one thing that bothers me, is will the lan play feel drastically different from bnet....? if it does it will make the competitive scene hard to break into as if its like BW bnet to Lan, thats a massive jump that players do not have access to it to prepare for an event.

ZenDeX

Philippines2916 Posts

June 14 2010 03:10 GMT

#173

On June 14 2010 12:03 Newguy wrote:
This makes me hungry for info on how international prelims will be run, would I, for example, be able to participate in international prelims?

Probably similar to how WCG runs their prelims. But I hope the format would be the single elims, 6-8 player per group, bo3.

Captain Peabody

United States3134 Posts

June 14 2010 03:11 GMT

#174

Looking at the current Bnet latency, for most of the world the experience shouldn't be very different at all...just a bit smoother. Bigger benefits of LAN for competitive play are stability (no lag spikes/disconnects to disrupt games) and lack of Bnet/cross realm issues.

ZenDeX

Philippines2916 Posts

June 14 2010 03:14 GMT

#175

Well... since Blizzard will be taking over ESPORTS, I bet they will also give LAN access to proteam houses. It makes sense since it would give incentive to players to join a proteam.

smekz

Portugal503 Posts

June 14 2010 03:17 GMT

#176

seems every1 will love blizz now, anyway if its true, great news

"haterz gonna love"

Azarkon

United States21060 Posts

June 14 2010 03:37 GMT

#177

Not everyone is going to love Blizzard for introducing a caste system into SC 2, with the vast majority of us as second-class citizens.

Trang

Australia324 Posts

June 14 2010 03:38 GMT

#178

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.

And how about smaller scale, amateur tournaments, which will have no way in hell of getting a Blizzard rep to come.

Azarkon

United States21060 Posts

June 14 2010 03:40 GMT

#179

Presuming LAN will actually be LAN (ie a low latency local area network), people who can practice on LAN will have a decisive advantage in LAN tournaments over people who can only practice on BNET, especially in countries with subpar internet connections. Ponder this for a moment, and then think about the potential drama and inequality it will generate if this rumor is true.

maneatingshoe

Canada484 Posts

June 14 2010 03:43 GMT

#180

An international OSL for SC2.....so hyped already