|
Baa?21242 Posts
More preliminary news/rumors from the June 24th news events!
1. There will be an oncoming "Ongame Net Starcraft 2 League," or OSL2.
2. The sponsor of the first one will be Korean Air.
3. The first OS2L will have prelimnaries from all over the world, and then the players will be gathered in Seoul for the Ro16.
4. There will be a "Starcraft 2 Professional Edition" that will only be provided to tournament organizers, which will include LAN functionality. Only with a special account + password that gets activated will it work. Blizzard staff will be present at tournaments to assist. Apparently this news was first told to the organizers of the Stars War after the tournament ended.
http://sc2.178.com/201006/70417839725.html
|
Wow, this is actually exciting news. Would prove to be amazing if it were true. OSL FTW!
|
So that should put an end to LAN crybabying, because tournaments are the only place where LAN is a true necessity.
|
Sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet.
If one pro edition were to get out on the web wouldn't that shitrape all of the no LAN anti piracy altogether though?
|
i want LAN too though 
|
Awesome news! These are exciting times. I'm so glad that LAN will be capable at tournaments, it should provide an easier experience for them(and less technical glitches for us, the viewer!)
|
LAN functionality, finally a good news...
International preliminaries, that's great!
I just hope that this won't interfere with the Broodwar OSL.
|
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.
No cuz LAN is still a very important part of a LAN party... I like being able to have fun playing on pcs next to my buds with all of us connected over a Router/switch... Sure it might be a neccessity for LAN at a tournament, but what if Blizzard staff are late to arrive? We hold the tournament until their flight arrives? That's pretty stupid...
|
so are these rumors or news?
|
wtf. massive catering to the asian servers. i mean, clan wars and tournaments like CSL (for the casual gamers) will most likely have to use bnet 2.0. I just dont see this "Professional Edition" spreading to the foreign community (at least not in the forseeable future).
PS: If they have lan functionality and gives it to the chinese (who hosted tournaments like stars war), wont the chinese just hack the shit out of it anyways? just saying blizzard, wtf
|
Hopefully both the starcraft 1 and starcraft 2 osls can coexist.
|
Only problem now is that I doubt you'll see this at anything but large events in which blizzard will bother attending.
|
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 do you figure? if there's LAN that only blizzard is allowed to use for official blizzard tournaments how the hell does that help the actual playerbase who have wanted LAN features to play with friends or at local LAN parties? this won't put an end to anything, other than showing that Blizzard did take the time to code LAN for sc2, but they don't trust the playerbase with it.
|
Oh rumor. If this is true wow what an event that will be. Korean Air international OSL would be so amazing
|
Yeah if this edition exists, it will be given out very exclusively as a single leak ruins all of the ani piracy no LAN for sc2.
And yes it's not a solution to no LAN "crybabying". Those who have friends do enjoy pc LANs.
|
On June 14 2010 06:22 TuElite wrote:
LAN functionality, finally a good news...
International preliminaries, that's great!
I just hope that this won't interfere with the Broodwar OSL.
lol, wishful thinking bro. notice first thing it said was OnGame Net Starcraft 2 League. maybe OGN will share the broadcast time for BW with SC2, but the main event is now gonna be SC2. do you really think BW is gonna get the same attention after that?
|
On the bright side its only a matter of time before this Lan version gets pirated/cracked an we can all enjoy Lan games! :D
|
OMG this is amazing news!
Where did I read something about a meeting in june?
LAN please?
|
I predict there will be a torrent "Starcraft 2 Professional Edition" on Pirate Bay the day after Blizzard let the chinese touch it for the first time.
Just make LAN native to all editions, so there will be less piracy.
|
if these rumors are true then we know what kotick was up for when he said that he wants "explore" things in sc2.
They want full control over esports so they can invest/push them and get money out of it at the same time.
|
|
|
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.
you need to go to a lan party bro. even if its just 2 ppl. and can you imagine TSL without lan latency or with massive lag? just look at how much the Stars Wars lagged, and they were in the same building.
|
|
|
EPIC? Of course Korean Air comes to save the day...
|
I blame piracy on the overpricing of video games. that leads me to blame this situation on Kotick
|
On June 14 2010 06:27 moopie wrote:Show nested quote +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 do you figure? if there's LAN that only blizzard is allowed to use for official blizzard tournaments how the hell does that help the actual playerbase who have wanted LAN features to play with friends or at local LAN parties? this won't put an end to anything, other than showing that Blizzard did take the time to code LAN for sc2, but they don't trust the playerbase with it.
But remember "The technology just isn't there yet".... OH WAIT! lol can't wait for the piracy to kick in once this gets out, its just a waiting game now. :D
|
On June 14 2010 06:29 fabiano wrote:
I predict there will be a torrent "Starcraft 2 Professional Edition" on Pirate Bay the day after Blizzard let the chinese touch it for the first time.
Just make LAN native to all editions, so there will be less piracy.
It won't matter if you can only use the pro edition with a special account and password provided to tourney hosts.
|
That's some good news at least. I think it's nice having a Professional Edition for tournaments,
|
On June 14 2010 06:20 Tone_ wrote:
Sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet.
If one pro edition were to get out on the web wouldn't that shitrape all of the no LAN anti piracy altogether though?
Special account and password.
You probably still need to go through blizzard servers before playing offline
|
On June 14 2010 06:27 moopie wrote:Show nested quote +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 do you figure? if there's LAN that only blizzard is allowed to use for official blizzard tournaments how the hell does that help the actual playerbase who have wanted LAN features to play with friends or at local LAN parties? this won't put an end to anything, other than showing that Blizzard did take the time to code LAN for sc2, but they don't trust the playerbase with it.
Because LAN is dead in the same way splitscreen on consoles is dead. Its rarely used compared to the online alternative, EXCEPT in tournament structures.
This fixes the tournament thing.
|
Here is blizzards choices
Allow LAN. All of China pirates the game, just like SC/BW
Don't allow LAN except for tourneys. A couple thousand people people "boycott" the game, but they still get sales from China.
Boy, tough decision
|
June 24th should be a good event can't wait for full details
|
Yeah, LAN is a necessity for tournaments. It's nice to have in general--especially if BNet2.0 continues to be as flaky as it was in the beta--but it's not really a necessity. And piracy is of course a big issue for Blizzard, so I can understand them not including it, even if it hurts the legitimate buyer's experience a bit.
|
finally, a little ray of sunshine that i'll be able to play sc2 at my local lan.
so sick of all the new games coming out only to find you can't play them on LAN without some form of connection to the internet.
CMON CHINA. take one for the time, hack away.
|
On June 14 2010 06:32 PanzerDragoon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 06:20 Tone_ wrote:
Sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet.
If one pro edition were to get out on the web wouldn't that shitrape all of the no LAN anti piracy altogether though? Special account and password. You probably still need to go through blizzard servers before playing offline
yes. IF all this is true then they implemented something like this.
anyway... to everyone who's supporting the idea of getting a cracked version of this:
shame on you!
|
On June 14 2010 06:31 Schnake wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 06:29 fabiano wrote:
I predict there will be a torrent "Starcraft 2 Professional Edition" on Pirate Bay the day after Blizzard let the chinese touch it for the first time.
Just make LAN native to all editions, so there will be less piracy. It won't matter if you can only use the pro edition with a special account and password provided to tourney hosts.
password'd things can usually be cracked
|
Russian Federation410 Posts
How does LAN automatically mean Piracy. Single player and Galaxe Editor will be functional in offline mode, - still a good enough reason to download the game. LAN doesn't mean dozens if not hundreds of pirated servers which is what happened with SCBW after PvPGN leaked everywhere.
|
On June 14 2010 06:31 Lightswarm wrote:
I blame piracy on the overpricing of video games. that leads me to blame this situation on Kotick
Starcraft 1 was $65 if you go by 2009 dollars.
|
maybe this is blizzard's way of giving us lan w/out activision interference
only for official in the pirate capital of the world huh...
|
On June 14 2010 06:38 Vei wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 06:31 Schnake wrote:On June 14 2010 06:29 fabiano wrote:
I predict there will be a torrent "Starcraft 2 Professional Edition" on Pirate Bay the day after Blizzard let the chinese touch it for the first time.
Just make LAN native to all editions, so there will be less piracy. It won't matter if you can only use the pro edition with a special account and password provided to tourney hosts. password'd things can usually be cracked
If they make the encryption right, then it would be nearly impossible. see skype.
|
|
|
so this is an admittance that blizzard purposely took functionality out of SC2. Not like we needed one, we knew that a while ago.
good stuff for OSL 2, bad stuff for the direction of bnet 2.0 and blizzard in terms of how they are trying to control their game and doing this stuff. sighs. They are just literally asking hackers to pirate their game now. And they will, because people are pissed.
|
Wow thats actually awesome news if it proves to be true.
Good to know that WCG and all that it sounds like will have Lan which is awesome so no worries about latency or Bnet "shutting down" during wcg (not like blizzard would do it anyway  ).
And for an OSL for sc2 this early would be awesome :D.
|
Russian Federation410 Posts
The thing will leak withing 24 hours, the Lan module will be extracted, the full-on working mode will pop withing days, - already been done to a couple of games.
|
On June 14 2010 06:44 avilo wrote:
so this is an admittance that blizzard purposely took functionality out of SC2. Not like we needed one, we knew that a while ago.
good stuff for OSL 2, bad stuff for the direction of bnet 2.0 and blizzard in terms of how they are trying to control their game and doing this stuff. sighs. They are just literally asking hackers to pirate their game now. And they will, because people are pissed.
No shit, Sherlock. Of course they have had LAN play for years, how do you think they played the game internally before Battlenet 2 even existed?
Also a ton of hackers have tried to hack the game for months now. No luck so far.
|
On June 14 2010 06:44 avilo wrote:
so this is an admittance that blizzard purposely took functionality out of SC2. Not like we needed one, we knew that a while ago.
good stuff for OSL 2, bad stuff for the direction of bnet 2.0 and blizzard in terms of how they are trying to control their game and doing this stuff. sighs. They are just literally asking hackers to pirate their game now. And they will, because people are pissed.
They are not literally asking hackers to pirate their game.
They want to have a share of the esports scene, yes. but this also means that they will invest and promote esports. i find this very, very good.
this might be the best way to legimitate esports all over the world.
gj blizz 
...if they dont screw up...
...and if this rumor is true at all...
|
Nice, a worldwide preliminary!
|
I wouldn't be surprised if LAN were added to the regular edition of the game on the second expansion, when it may be expected that everyone intending to buy the game would have bought it already and would have no reason to pirate it.
|
|
|
I hope Day9 has already been contacted to cast OS2L for the english speaking audience.
|
sc2 professional edition will probably get leaked. then we'll have lan! :D
|
On June 14 2010 06:54 fishyjoes wrote:
I hope Day9 has already been contacted to cast OS2L for the english speaking audience.
I think Tasteless is a more likely choice, if any.
|
Corinthos
Canada1842 Posts
Interesting news Carnivorous Sheep, thanks.
I'm happy they are going to introduce LAN suuport in some way, but I am also a bit confused at it. Would players have trouble playing/accommodating in these tournaments because they aren't used to the latency on LAN? *it may be very minimal* Players will still be practicing on battle.net before they participate in the tournaments.
This also doesn't help local, private or smaller runned tournaments.
* I don't know how comparable the latency on b.net is atm compared to lan (like playing on iccup) ** the latency atm is very good though
|
Sorry, but this reeks of 1999. You'll have perfect latency in your tournament games thanks to Blizzard releasing a professional edition with LAN functionality so tournaments aren't contingent on the reliability of Battle.net 2.0 and so you can have lots of people playing. Yet you won't get to practice in this environment, because there is no basic multiplayer version of LAN.
Even if you're on a team, you'll still be connecting through Battle.net 2.0. Suppose the professional edition does get released to professional team houses (not indicated). That means players who aren't members of such teams don't even get fair practice conditions. It depends how big you think the difference between Battle.net 2.0 latency and LAN latency is, I guess, but it still seems like a backwards step to me, to say nothing of regular LAN parties.
That said, at least they're doing this much. Great news about OS2L. Region-locking here probably means each region will have an apportioned number of players from the qualifying stages. This is counter-intuitive because it wouldn't be strictly based on merit. It's a disease in WCG that feels out of place in a Starleague.
|
On June 14 2010 06:55 Eury wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 06:54 fishyjoes wrote:
I hope Day9 has already been contacted to cast OS2L for the english speaking audience. I think Tasteless is a more likely choice, if any.
More likely, but I hope they both get to cast it, together is better! ^_^
Great news though, <3 Artosis
|
I am very happy that Blizzard's ESPORTS team seems to actually be doing some good for ESPORTS. I hope the bnet team has something just as good in store
Also day9+tasteless+artosis casting trifecta? :O I really doubt that will happen, but a kid can dream.
|
So this pretty much says MAJOR TOURNAMENTS ONLY. No little LAN event can be run without Blizzard stuff. That's pretty funny.
|
On June 14 2010 06:33 PanzerDragoon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 06:27 moopie wrote: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 do you figure? if there's LAN that only blizzard is allowed to use for official blizzard tournaments how the hell does that help the actual playerbase who have wanted LAN features to play with friends or at local LAN parties? this won't put an end to anything, other than showing that Blizzard did take the time to code LAN for sc2, but they don't trust the playerbase with it. Because LAN is dead in the same way splitscreen on consoles is dead. Its rarely used compared to the online alternative, EXCEPT in tournament structures. This fixes the tournament thing.
LAN is dead? Split screen and consoles are dead? Do you have some hard data to back that up or , and i dont want to be rude, you are just ignorant enough to generalize based on your own life.
|
Aren't this super-wild guesses?
How is the tone of the article? Are they just speculating?
|
On June 14 2010 06:33 PanzerDragoon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 06:27 moopie wrote: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 do you figure? if there's LAN that only blizzard is allowed to use for official blizzard tournaments how the hell does that help the actual playerbase who have wanted LAN features to play with friends or at local LAN parties? this won't put an end to anything, other than showing that Blizzard did take the time to code LAN for sc2, but they don't trust the playerbase with it. Because LAN is dead in the same way splitscreen on consoles is dead. Its rarely used compared to the online alternative, EXCEPT in tournament structures. This fixes the tournament thing.
I take it you've never ever been to a LAN party or any small tournament. This doesn't "fix" the tournament thing, this "fixes" Blizzard's tournaments (that didn't really need fixing, see below). Which for the forseeable future will be WCG, a starleague or 2 (through GOM and possibly OGN/MBC), and that's about it. If you think that 100% of the playerbase who wanted LAN or used it for bw (some still do) did so for WCG than you are pretty clueless. Requiring Blizzard individuals to 'oversee' a LAN tournament means that 99.9% of tournaments that would use LAN can't.
A Blizzard run tournament doesn't even need LAN technically since they can just set up a local private server for it. The community (who can't run private servers without breaking the law) needs LAN.
I have a feeling you have no idea what the real issue here is based on you calling the desire for LAN "crybabying" or saying that LAN is dead. I give up.
|
Russian Federation410 Posts
On June 14 2010 07:06 ataryens wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 06:33 PanzerDragoon wrote:On June 14 2010 06:27 moopie wrote: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 do you figure? if there's LAN that only blizzard is allowed to use for official blizzard tournaments how the hell does that help the actual playerbase who have wanted LAN features to play with friends or at local LAN parties? this won't put an end to anything, other than showing that Blizzard did take the time to code LAN for sc2, but they don't trust the playerbase with it. Because LAN is dead in the same way splitscreen on consoles is dead. Its rarely used compared to the online alternative, EXCEPT in tournament structures. This fixes the tournament thing. LAN is dead? Split screen and consoles are dead? Do you have some hard data to back that up or , and i dont want to be rude, you are just ignorant enough to generalize based on your own life.
It's a conspiracy, Lan's been dead since 1993, but every single multiplayer game developer has been putting it in just to keep it a secret.
Some say he's been going around the world splitting screens for over a decade, he stopped the second a black man was elected president of United States, - all we know is, he's called the Stig.
|
I'd love to see the lan functionality happen to smaller tournaments .. but I'm sure the blizzard reps cannot be present there
|
Woah, the international preliminaries is awesome news. I hope Brood War will have at least a few more seasons in it, though. I really don't have much interest at all in spectating StarCraft II.
|
Are they going to pay for airfare for Ukraine to Seoul and back?
|
With Korean Air as the sponsor, I'm sure they can do just that.
|
I just hope for these "international preliminaries" that top players are chosen and not filler players... Having let say 16 players where half clearly dominates rest is wrong.
|
Damn, this sounds amazing if its true.
Players like Nony and Idra must feel pretty excited about it ;>
|
Russian Federation410 Posts
How the hell are they going to hold 'international' preliminaries with region locks, or is it going to be 3-4 players from each of the four regions?
|
|
|
This is awesome. Hopefully it turns out to be true
|
On June 14 2010 07:13 Too_MuchZerg wrote:
I just hope for these "international preliminaries" that top players are chosen and not filler players... Having let say 16 players where half clearly dominates rest is wrong.
Having, let's say 16 players were half or more are invited purely based on hype/known names is also wrong. Just thought I'd add it in there 
I personally hope it's a qualifier, not a "we choose so and so by their name" type of bs.
|
How exclusive is this lan going to be though? I'm guessing only major big tourneys will get access to it.
|
On June 14 2010 07:21 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 07:13 Too_MuchZerg wrote:
I just hope for these "international preliminaries" that top players are chosen and not filler players... Having let say 16 players where half clearly dominates rest is wrong. Having, let's say 16 players were half or more are invited purely based on hype/known names is also wrong. Just thought I'd add it in there I personally hope it's a qualifier, not a "we choose so and so by their name" type of bs.
I meant not invited but chosen by rough preliminaries where only top players gets spots. I just hope without saying which country has best players gets more players qualified than EU/US gets.
|
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Standard Edition
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Premium Edition (with chatrooms)
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Professional Edition (with LAN support)
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Ultimate Edition (with lan+chatroom + bonus map pack + cross realm play)
(this is a joke)
|
|
|
RumorRumorRumorRumorRumor
RumorRumorRumorRumorRumor
RumorRumor
RumorRumorRumorRumorRumor
RumorRumorRumorRumorRumor
RumorRumorRumor
Complete hearsay. However, it shows that they have LAN and competition in mind if in fact they do this. Yay. Maybe.
|
This is very exciting news.
I think this will be a very good thing for SC2 in the next few years but I am not sure about the long-term when Blizz loses interest. Hopefully some other solution will pop up by then.
Sooooo excited to see how they run the preliminaries.
|
Russian Federation410 Posts
On June 14 2010 07:24 Hikari wrote:
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Standard Edition
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Premium Edition (with chatrooms)
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Professional Edition (with LAN support)
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Ultimate Edition (with lan+chatroom + bonus map pack + cross realm play)
(this is a joke)
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Game Of The Year Collector's Ultimate Edition Battle Chest - $500
|
Starcraft 2 Achievement&Portrait Pack - $30
|
On June 14 2010 07:28 Go0g3n wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 07:24 Hikari wrote:
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Standard Edition
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Premium Edition (with chatrooms)
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Professional Edition (with LAN support)
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Ultimate Edition (with lan+chatroom + bonus map pack + cross realm play)
(this is a joke) Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Game Of The Year Collector's Ultimate Edition - $500
It may look like a joke, but the most expensive version SC2 as of now would be:
5 (gateways, there may be more, right now we know Russia,south America, north America, Asia, Europe ) x 3 (expansions) x $60 = $900
(And I'm not counting them as the $100 version)
|
On June 14 2010 07:24 Hikari wrote:
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Standard Edition
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Premium Edition (with chatrooms)
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Professional Edition (with LAN support)
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Ultimate Edition (with lan+chatroom + bonus map pack + cross realm play)
(this is a joke)
NO THIS IS A JOKE
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Standard Edition
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Premium Edition (with chatrooms)
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Professional Edition (with LAN support)
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Ultimate Edition (with lan+chatroom + bonus map pack + cross realm play)
Starcraft 2 Zerg: Heart of the Swarm Standard Edition
Starcraft 2 Zerg: Heart of the Swarm Premium Edition (with chatrooms)
Starcraft 2 Zerg: Heart of the Swarm Professional Edition (with LAN support)
Starcraft 2 Zerg: Heart of the Swarm (with lan+chatroom + bonus map pack + cross realm play)
Starcraft 2 Protoss: Legacy of the Void Standard Edition
Starcraft 2 Protoss: Legacy of the Void Premium Edition (with chatrooms)
Starcraft 2 Protoss: Legacy of the Void Professional Edition (with LAN support)
Starcraft 2 Protoss: Legacy of the Void (with lan+chatroom + bonus map pack + cross realm play)
Starcraft 2 ULTRA Edition: Everything 1000$
that is a joke
|
Well the professional edition will no doubt be leaked and cracked, which should make lan partys possible.
Good news on the OSL2, exciting stuff.
|
On June 14 2010 07:34 opticalza wrote:
Well the professional edition will no doubt be leaked and cracked, which should make lan partys possible.
Good news on the OSL2, exciting stuff.
I have high hopes for this also :D
|
Woah, exciting news!
Sponsored by Korean Air?!
The OSL lives.
|
Heh, something is wrong when the consumers are waiting for a leak and a crack.
|
On June 14 2010 07:25 Inori wrote:
This is hilarious.
Instead of implementing a literally must-have features of a multi-player game, they are going to milk big money for the priviledge of using it.
How greedy can you get.
businesses are made to make money
if you were working for blizzard, you probably wouldn't mind cause you'd be getting a pretty big bonus
|
I see this as a great solution if they're not too stickler-ey with selling that version.
|
On June 14 2010 07:43 0neder wrote:
I see this as a great solution if they're not too stickler-ey with selling that version.
They aren't selling that version, they license it for big tournaments and have babysitters there anyway.
|
I'm going to say this again, pirates should stop thinking that Blizzard's failures somehow justifies their piracy. If you think that piracy's right either way and you were going to pirate the game in the first place, fine. "This game doesn't have feature X so it's okay for me to pirate it kekekeke" is not, and it should be obvious why.
|
I foresee that the LAN-solution will be a local Battlenet 2.0 proxy server which will let the players create games with each other without the need of game packets going through Battlenet 2.0 servers. The special client will be the the usual client pointing towards a local Battlenet 2.0 server instead of the US, EU or Asian servers. To avoid any pirated versions from getting out this solution would only be provided to authorized tournaments and handled by Blizzard staff only. Maybe Blizzard would have a plug-and-play server to avoid the need of installing the server software in a unsecure environment.
At least this is how I would have solved it if I worked for Blizzard.
|
Wtf? So anyone wanting to use LAN for their tournament will have to pay to have guys from Blizzard there to help them?
God I hate Blizzard as of late. Not just because of this, this would just be giving me more reason to be angry.
|
On June 14 2010 07:34 opticalza wrote:
Well the professional edition will no doubt be leaked and cracked, which should make lan partys possible.
Good news on the OSL2, exciting stuff.
All our hopes lie on China...
|
If this is true, I will be so happy. OSL2 with worldwide prelims OMG. This would send SC2 forward so fast
|
On June 14 2010 07:57 Redmark wrote:
I'm going to say this again, pirates should stop thinking that Blizzard's failures somehow justifies their piracy. If you think that piracy's right either way and you were going to pirate the game in the first place, fine. "This game doesn't have feature X so it's okay for me to pirate it kekekeke" is not, and it should be obvious why.
Oh thank you very much for this post. All that "lolz i will now pirate teh game cuz blizz fucked up bnet" is getting really really annoying.
I mean this is so interesting "news". Its all about the future of esports and the influence blizzard might have for the good or the bad. but ppl are shitting that "haha it will be leaked and then we have lan" stuff over the thread...
|
Mmmm. Artosis still full of it?
|
I'll wait and see, because if the latency makes a difference, you will have to release it for everyone because otherwise you have unfair practice environment etc. It solves one problem while creating a ton of others.
|
Russian Federation410 Posts
On June 14 2010 08:00 clickrush wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 07:57 Redmark wrote:
I'm going to say this again, pirates should stop thinking that Blizzard's failures somehow justifies their piracy. If you think that piracy's right either way and you were going to pirate the game in the first place, fine. "This game doesn't have feature X so it's okay for me to pirate it kekekeke" is not, and it should be obvious why. Oh thank you very much for this post. All that "lolz i will now pirate teh game cuz blizz fucked up bnet" is getting really really annoying. I mean this is so interesting "news". Its all about the future of esports and the influence blizzard might have for the good or the bad. but ppl are shitting that "haha it will be leaked and then we have lan" stuff over the thread...
It isn't about piracy, justifying anything or retaliation to Blizzard for whatever. It's about people getting what they want using any means necessary, in this case - cracking/hacking/pirating the game,
|
On June 14 2010 07:40 Draconicfire wrote:
Heh, something is wrong when the consumers are waiting for a leak and a crack.
This.
If the "LAN Edition" is real... it's hilarious. How can Blizzard screw its clients out of LAN play and then offer it to certain people like that? It's just bad business and a blatant screwjob towards paying customers.
|
 Awsome news! I can't wait to see who the first SC2 OSL champ is 
|
On June 14 2010 06:17 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:More preliminary news/rumors from the June 24th news events! 1. There will be an oncoming "Ongame Net Starcraft 2 League," or OSL2. 2. The sponsor of the first one will be Korean Air. 3. The first OS2L will have prelimnaries from all over the world, and then the players will be gathered in Seoul for the Ro16. 4. There will be a "Starcraft 2 Professional Edition" that will only be provided to tournament organizers, which will include LAN functionality. Only with a special account + password that gets activated will it work. Blizzard staff will be present at tournaments to assist. Apparently this news was first told to the organizers of the Stars War after the tournament ended. http://sc2.178.com/201006/70417839725.html
So they finally decided to put LAN in. But only for tournament organizers? What about LAN for the public? Sure, it's great that people can host SC2 tournaments but in my opinion, I'm not going to go to a tournament and be all srs bizness just to have LAN functionality. I'm not saying playing in tournaments isn't fun but most of the time, I'll want the LAN functionality to have a LAN party where I can be relax and have a good time with my friends.
And seriously? Professional Edition? What are they fuckin thinking? Is Blizzard (probably Activision's idea -.-) taking ideas from Microsoft now?
|
This is fucking ridiculous, who in the hell at Blizzard are making these decisions?
|
Seriously stop bitching about LAN. It's not gonna happen, get over it. This is good news. LAN is now available for the most crucial situation; offline tournaments. Hopefully, if this news is legit.
|
If this is true, I wonder how long it'll be before Blizzard officially confirms this Professional Edition exists. One of the beta forum Blizz reps said they are planning to address the various concerns about b.net 2.0 features in the near future; perhaps they will make the announcement at that time as a response to concerns about LAN and tournament features? A Pro Edition with cross-region support, LAN and tournament organizing tools built in would make a lot of sense as a way to address these issues at least for the pro community, gain more market control over the eSports industry their games tend to create and avoid changing the retail game's functionality at all. I also wonder if Blizz reps on-site will be required to take advantage of some or all of the Pro Edition-only features, thus giving Blizz absolute control over events and tournaments, or if that's just optional for large, high profile events like this one seems to be.
|
On June 14 2010 06:17 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
4. There will be a "Starcraft 2 Professional Edition" that will only be provided to tournament organizers, which will include LAN functionality.
thank god, now i am much less worried about esports
|
On June 14 2010 07:42 awu25 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 07:25 Inori wrote:
This is hilarious.
Instead of implementing a literally must-have features of a multi-player game, they are going to milk big money for the priviledge of using it.
How greedy can you get. businesses are made to make money if you were working for blizzard, you probably wouldn't mind cause you'd be getting a pretty big bonus
The shareholders of a business would want the business to make money on the long term, however, some, like the CEO of a business, want to max their bonuses based on short term profits/revenues. If Activision Blizzard continue this way, tthey will make alot of money on the short term and go out of business in 10-15 years. But Bobby wont be working there anymore then.
|
On June 14 2010 08:17 captainwaffles wrote:
This is fucking ridiculous, who in the hell at Blizzard are making these decisions?
Its not blizzard anymore just Activision hiding behind a mask.
|
On June 14 2010 08:25 ataryens wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 07:42 awu25 wrote:On June 14 2010 07:25 Inori wrote:
This is hilarious.
Instead of implementing a literally must-have features of a multi-player game, they are going to milk big money for the priviledge of using it.
How greedy can you get. businesses are made to make money if you were working for blizzard, you probably wouldn't mind cause you'd be getting a pretty big bonus The shareholders of a business would want the business to make money on the long term, however, some, like the CEO of a business, want to max their bonuses based on short term profits/revenues. If Activision Blizzard continue this way, tthey will make alot of money on the short term and go out of business in 10-15 years. But Bobby wont be working there anymore then.
This is only true if they only control and get money out of the esports scene. but if they also invest in it and promote it then we have a longterm success and sc2 esport will grow even larger than bw did.
|
Wonder what you need to do/who you need to be to be recognized as a "tourney organizer".
|
On June 14 2010 08:34 ckw wrote:
Wonder what you need to do/who you need to be to be recognized as a "tourney organizer".
Organize a tournament? : )
|
On June 14 2010 06:20 Ideas wrote:i want LAN too though
What he said! 
On June 14 2010 07:59 r33k wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 07:34 opticalza wrote:
Well the professional edition will no doubt be leaked and cracked, which should make lan partys possible.
Good news on the OSL2, exciting stuff. All our hopes lie on China...
Come on China!! don't let us down!!
|
On June 14 2010 07:57 Batch wrote:
I foresee that the LAN-solution will be a local Battlenet 2.0 proxy server which will let the players create games with each other without the need of game packets going through Battlenet 2.0 servers. The special client will be the the usual client pointing towards a local Battlenet 2.0 server instead of the US, EU or Asian servers. To avoid any pirated versions from getting out this solution would only be provided to authorized tournaments and handled by Blizzard staff only. Maybe Blizzard would have a plug-and-play server to avoid the need of installing the server software in a unsecure environment.
At least this is how I would have solved it if I worked for Blizzard.
i was just thinking of the same. but it's only a matter of time when it will leak, i mean, it's 2010. i really think that blizzard will have a very, very difficult time fighting piracy after they get LAN into play.
As for the other rumors, even when i don't have a PC to run SC2 from, i believe these rumors are fantastic for Kennigit (ESPORTS).
|
you guys sure are raging hardcore over some rumors.
|
On June 14 2010 08:45 s.a.y wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 07:57 Batch wrote:
I foresee that the LAN-solution will be a local Battlenet 2.0 proxy server which will let the players create games with each other without the need of game packets going through Battlenet 2.0 servers. The special client will be the the usual client pointing towards a local Battlenet 2.0 server instead of the US, EU or Asian servers. To avoid any pirated versions from getting out this solution would only be provided to authorized tournaments and handled by Blizzard staff only. Maybe Blizzard would have a plug-and-play server to avoid the need of installing the server software in a unsecure environment.
At least this is how I would have solved it if I worked for Blizzard. i was just thinking of the same. but it's only a matter of time when it will leak, i mean, it's 2010. i really think that blizzard will have a very, very difficult time fighting piracy after they get LAN into play. As for the other rumors, even when i don't have a PC to run SC2 from, i believe these rumors are fantastic for Kennigit (ESPORTS).
I think this is unlikely. I think it would be more dangerous to have the entire battle.net 2.0 server code floating around somewhere as opposed to just LAN code floating around somewhere.
|
United States47024 Posts
On June 14 2010 07:34 shalafi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 07:28 Go0g3n wrote:On June 14 2010 07:24 Hikari wrote:
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Standard Edition
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Premium Edition (with chatrooms)
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Professional Edition (with LAN support)
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Ultimate Edition (with lan+chatroom + bonus map pack + cross realm play)
(this is a joke) Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty Game Of The Year Collector's Ultimate Edition - $500 It may look like a joke, but the most expensive version SC2 as of now would be: 5 (gateways, there may be more, right now we know Russia,south America, north America, Asia, Europe ) x 3 (expansions) x $60 = $900 (And I'm not counting them as the $100 version)
Aren't the Russian and SA localizations only for that reduced-cost subscription version?
|
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 08:59 Disastorm wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 08:45 s.a.y wrote:On June 14 2010 07:57 Batch wrote:
I foresee that the LAN-solution will be a local Battlenet 2.0 proxy server which will let the players create games with each other without the need of game packets going through Battlenet 2.0 servers. The special client will be the the usual client pointing towards a local Battlenet 2.0 server instead of the US, EU or Asian servers. To avoid any pirated versions from getting out this solution would only be provided to authorized tournaments and handled by Blizzard staff only. Maybe Blizzard would have a plug-and-play server to avoid the need of installing the server software in a unsecure environment.
At least this is how I would have solved it if I worked for Blizzard. i was just thinking of the same. but it's only a matter of time when it will leak, i mean, it's 2010. i really think that blizzard will have a very, very difficult time fighting piracy after they get LAN into play. As for the other rumors, even when i don't have a PC to run SC2 from, i believe these rumors are fantastic for Kennigit (ESPORTS). I think this is unlikely. I think it would be more dangerous to have the entire battle.net 2.0 server code floating around somewhere as opposed to just LAN code floating around somewhere.
yes, but at the same time it would be quite easy to shut down bnet 2.0 servers outside of china, while it would be almost impossible to fight against a leaked LAN module (that would be implemented in some kind of a launcher, iccup style).
|
Why are all of you complaining about this. There will rarely be any tournament which have all the players together locally in one room. And as for recreationally what is wrong with playing over battle net?
|
On June 14 2010 09:14 Uninstall wrote:
Why are all of you complaining about this. There will rarely be any tournament which have all the players together locally in one room. And as for recreationally what is wrong with playing over battle net?
You are completely wrong about tournaments.
As for the second point, I live in a house with four other university students. Quite often the latency to B-net gets really high in the evenings, so this would be the perfect time to practice with a RL friend offline. The reason Blizzard give about region lock - high latency - is the reason why I demand to have LAN as an option.
|
This is so stupid. You have to be top ranked in the world to have LAN function. Lol.
|
On June 14 2010 07:57 Redmark wrote:
I'm going to say this again, pirates should stop thinking that Blizzard's failures somehow justifies their piracy. If you think that piracy's right either way and you were going to pirate the game in the first place, fine. "This game doesn't have feature X so it's okay for me to pirate it kekekeke" is not, and it should be obvious why.
It's still piracy either way, but Blizzard's business model and their public attitude is, essentially, asking for it. I'm buying the game either way, but if an alternative means of playing multiplayer arises outside of Battle.net 2.0 and their ridiculous policies, who can say what people would do?
You guys realize that playing on iCCup is piracy just the same as this, right?
|
I'm going to go ahead and be unpopular here and say this may turn out to be a an acceptable compromise. It depends on the cost of SC2 "professional edition" and the restrictions placed upon it.
If LAN parties are truly that important to you, than buying a $100 copy of SC2 that lets you lan up 24 people or so, doesn't seem like the most unreasonable thing in the world (assuming you could add expo's for minimum cost).
Unlike a lot of people at TL, I do think eventually Blizzard will offer cross-realm play by popular demand. Its simply too important to competitive play in the long run. In the mean time, I'm sure its not a big deal for the players that play professionally to get multiple clients and access other servers. Its mostly a hindrance for people with friends on different realms and curious hasu-level players.
I'm not a fan of B.net 2.0's direction, but I think for all practical purposes, it's problems are not "game-breaking" for anyone that actually likes the game.
|
I am now going to pirate sc2 (tournament edition).
|
It doesn't sound like you can just walk into GameStop and buy a $100 copy of SC2 with features you actually want. Not if you can only get on with special login information with Blizzard thugs showing up to make sure their software doesn't get into the wrong hands.
|
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"?
This was the reason they gave for not having cross realm support, not LAN. The only justification they gave for no LAN is that they thought it would allow them to provide a better experience with Bnet 2 with having you "always connected" to the service.
|
On June 14 2010 08:28 GodIsNotHere wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 08:17 captainwaffles wrote:
This is fucking ridiculous, who in the hell at Blizzard are making these decisions? Its not blizzard anymore just Activision hiding behind a mask.
Trust me when I tell you Activision wouldn't even allow this kind of LAN if it were up to them at all.
I don't see why people are crying about this, I never used LAN anyway so I don't care too much about that. (plus we all know someone will make it just won't be "legal" like in modern warfail 2 they put the console and all that stuff back ).
I would much rather it be like this then no LAN at all for tournaments like WCG or leagues like this.
|
On June 14 2010 06:17 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
4. There will be a "Starcraft 2 Professional Edition" that will only be provided to tournament organizers, which will include LAN functionality. Only with a special account + password that gets activated will it work. Blizzard staff will be present at tournaments to assist. Apparently this news was first told to the organizers of the Stars War after the tournament ended. Um, if this is true, it means Blizzard officially announce that they do not include LAN support in SC2 only due to commercial reasons, and not technical reasons (which many commentators tried to claim before).
Following this tendency, I hope SC3 does not force each player to have a Blizzard official supervisor at home, in order to play the game.
|
This is most excellent news for esports! I look forward to (hopefully) seeing some of my fav pro's switch over to sc2.
And Korean Air flying in the top16 from around the world? Well played, Blizzard. This is the kind of future for esports I have been dreaming of.
As for all of you detractors and naysayers, I find you all pathetic and laughable. Logging into b.net isn't good enough for you? Tough shit, deal with it. C'est la vie.
|
On June 14 2010 09:32 Captain Peabody wrote:Show nested quote +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"? This was the reason they gave for not having cross realm support, not LAN. The only justification they gave for no LAN is that they thought it would allow them to provide a better experience with Bnet 2 with having you "always connected" to the service.
IncGamers: I have one more question. I know you said you're not going to support LAN play with StarCraft, but there has been rumours that there might be some semi-offline mode – log on once to make sure that you have the client, and can connect. Are there any such plans?
Frank Pearce: The offline mode would be for the single-player component, so if you want to play the campaign offline, if you validate the version on Battle.net and then you play offline for campaign.
IncGamers: If you have a really bad internet connection, but you have a couple of friends there...
Frank Pearce: That functionality's not there. Our goal is to make sure that connectivity to the Battle.net servers is such that that's the experience that people want.
Could you elaborate a bit, please? I don't really see how this is connected to region lock at all.
|
On June 14 2010 09:30 t3tsubo wrote:
I am now going to pirate sc2 (tournament edition).
Just don't play at all, pirating makes you a little bitch who doesn't care about the work a company put into the game and still feels entitled to play the game for free. If you won't play without LAN just don't play. If people don't buy SC2 then blizzard will not support SC2 and if the game is good enough to play you should pay for it
|
Blizzard could probably make more money, if they were to give away the whole game for free, and rely on fan support donations / voluntary e-purchasing, and perhaps some share of the profit from leagues (TV commercials and tickets) + merchandise. The reason: this would keep the community large, healthy and active, which is the main inspiration for some of the wealthy fans of the game to donate a lot.
|
On June 14 2010 09:42 Sputty wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 09:30 t3tsubo wrote:
I am now going to pirate sc2 (tournament edition). Just don't play at all, pirating makes you a little bitch who doesn't care about the work a company put into the game and still feels entitled to play the game for free. If you won't play without LAN just don't play. If people don't buy SC2 then blizzard will not support SC2 and if the game is good enough to play you should pay for it Who said anything about not buying it? I'm going to buy sc2 on release day no questions asked. But if there is a leaked version available later on with LAN support I'm sure as hell going to pirate it.
There's just no way that I, as a paying customer(I've bought every single blizzard PC title btw) will be content with an inferior product because they are greedy assholes while at the same time people who download it for free without paying gets the real deal.
|
Artosis
United States2140 Posts
I'll be accepting apologies until the end of the day.
|
On June 14 2010 09:42 Sputty wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 09:30 t3tsubo wrote:
I am now going to pirate sc2 (tournament edition). Just don't play at all, pirating makes you a little bitch who doesn't care about the work a company put into the game and still feels entitled to play the game for free. If you won't play without LAN just don't play. If people don't buy SC2 then blizzard will not support SC2 and if the game is good enough to play you should pay for it
Do you feel the same way when somebody has a pirated version of Microsoft Word? He just said that he went from being a paying consume to someone who isn't going to pay for the game. Its like the idea that people who pirate games are the ones who wouldn't buy them in the first place. obviously that isn't the case 100% of the time, and maybe not the majority of the time, but it obviously is here and blizzard doesn't lose the manufacturing costs of somebody stealing their product if he downloads data.
|
On June 14 2010 10:00 Artosis wrote:
I'll be accepting apologies until the end of the day.
Don't worry Artosis I never lost faith I believed you unlike the other people :D
|
I concur, these pirates are spoiled entitled children. But wait and see, there has to be some form of copy protection on tourney edition, and or alternatively the tourney edition is crippled in the sense that it cannot run campaign modes, nor connect to Battle.net.
|
On June 14 2010 09:38 JustAnotherKnave wrote:
As for all of you detractors and naysayers, I find you all pathetic and laughable. Logging into b.net isn't good enough for you? Tough shit, deal with it. C'est la vie.
I'm perfectly fine logging in to bnet to verify my copy. I'm not perfectly fine having internet quality latency to the guy sitting in the room next to me at a 100+ person lan party with a shared line.
You people act like having a tourney version fixed all the shit that blizzard has done wrong. Guess what, you're never going to be able to buy an official tourney version. It is going to be under lock and key under blizzard rep supervision at official sponsored events. The only place you may see it is on a pirate site.
|
its stupid though because everyone will be practicing without LAN so when they get to the tourney they wont be used to LAN latency and their control will be way off.
|
uhh what... no long except for specific special people thats dumb I enjoy my self a lan party and well without lan its hard to do a "lan party"
|
On June 14 2010 10:10 Ideas wrote:
its stupid though because everyone will be practicing without LAN so when they get to the tourney they wont be used to LAN latency and their control will be way off.
There's built-in latency at like 125 ms so it shouldn't affect people very much or at all
|
No cuz LAN is still a very important part of a LAN party... I like being able to have fun playing on pcs next to my buds with all of us connected over a Router/switch... Sure it might be a neccessity for LAN at a tournament, but what if Blizzard staff are late to arrive? We hold the tournament until their flight arrives? That's pretty stupid...
You can all play on the same router you know. There isn't any lag anymore I tried it myself. Everyone just needs to login to there own accounts.
|
On June 14 2010 10:10 Ideas wrote:
its stupid though because everyone will be practicing without LAN so when they get to the tourney they wont be used to LAN latency and their control will be way off.
thats a good point actually. Maybe proteams should be eligible for a LAN network in the progaming house.
|
On June 14 2010 10:13 Bob300 wrote:
You can all play on the same router you know. There isn't any lag anymore I tried it myself. Everyone just needs to login to there own accounts.
Have you ever been to a large lan party? I'm not talking about 10 people in a basement.
|
Good news indeed. The details are scarce, so we don't know a huge amount about the LAN functionality. It is quite possible that LAN will be available to the player houses and such, so that people can practice and such. One strong step towards great eSports.
To all you Pirates.
See this is why Blizz wasn't going to release LAN. Because a Pirate will Pirate. They will find some justification behind it. They will find any way to do it for any reason. Right now, you say it is because Blizz is greedy and is withholding functionality, so you are going to steal it. If LAN was available, you would say it is because Xrealm was withheld. If that was available you would say chatrooms... if that was available, you would say it is because Activision is evil... you will find ANY way you possibly can for whatever reason, your broken, prepubescent brains can come up with. Blizz cannot make a game so good and so perfect that people will not pirate it.
Proof: LAN is now available for the circumstances it is most necessary, and people are already finding new justification to pirate it. Now the pirate children are getting boners because Blizz has a weakness in the system....
God, I hope they found a way to prevent this from getting leaked and Pirated...
|
hey, the lan function can be made so the build in latency is the same as battle net, the only purpose of lan is so that you dont disconnect during a tournament? get it guys?
|
United States5162 Posts
On June 14 2010 10:18 Zanez.smarty wrote:
Good news indeed. The details are scarce, so we don't know a huge amount about the LAN functionality. It is quite possible that LAN will be available to the player houses and such, so that people can practice and such. One strong step towards great eSports.
To all you Pirates.
See this is why Blizz wasn't going to release LAN. Because a Pirate will Pirate. They will find some justification behind it. They will find any way to do it for any reason. Right now, you say it is because Blizz is greedy and is withholding functionality, so you are going to steal it. If LAN was available, you would say it is because Xrealm was withheld. If that was available you would say chatrooms... if that was available, you would say it is because Activision is evil... you will find ANY way you possibly can for whatever reason, your broken, prepubescent brains can come up with. Blizz cannot make a game so good and so perfect that people will not pirate it.
Proof: LAN is now available for the circumstances it is most necessary, and people are already finding new justification to pirate it. Now the pirate children are getting boners because Blizz has a weakness in the system....
God, I hope they found a way to prevent this from getting leaked and Pirated...
Most people don't pirate every game they own, even if they do own some pirated games. Giving pirates access to a better version of the game than a paying customer can own is asking for people to use the pirated version. And the fact is, Blizzard can't stop pirates, just like Ubisoft didn't.
|
On June 14 2010 10:18 Zanez.smarty wrote:
Proof: LAN is now available for the circumstances it is most necessary, and people are already finding new justification to pirate it. Now the pirate children are getting boners because Blizz has a weakness in the system....
Sounds kinda like you have a boner for pirates.
I'm not going to pirate the game, but I am going to find a way to have lan functionality at lan parties! Whether by server emulator, patched client, whatever.
God, I hope they found a way to prevent this from getting leaked and Pirated...
This is impossible.
|
On June 14 2010 10:23 artanis2 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 10:18 Zanez.smarty wrote:
Proof: LAN is now available for the circumstances it is most necessary, and people are already finding new justification to pirate it. Now the pirate children are getting boners because Blizz has a weakness in the system....
Sounds kinda like you have a boner for pirates. I'm not going to pirate the game, but I am going to find a way to have lan functionality at lan parties! Whether by server emulator, patched client, whatever. Show nested quote +
God, I hope they found a way to prevent this from getting leaked and Pirated...
This is impossible.
I couldn't have said it better myself. Seriously there is this idea that anyone using something pirated must be greedy/evil or something. Lets see I own , 1 copy of all warcraft games, 1 copy of Diablo1, Diablo2 + the expansion, 2 copys of starcraft/broodwars and a battle chest, and Ive played WoW for a few years.... YUP I really haven't supported Blizzard at all!
Also yes I plan on getting a copy on release I have the collectors edition pre-ordered.
|
I will also pirate the game IF there is a LAN version.
I will purchase the game on launch but I see no reason that I shouldn't be able to utilize a feature if its available. The "supposed" point of having no LAN is due to piracy.
If I've paid for the game I see nothing wrong with pirating a working LAN feature so I can enjoy the game to its fullest... My fondest memories of BW are 2-3 of my buddies in the same room playing....
It really was a whole different social aspect to the game and one of the things that helped make it great IMO...
|
Thanks to pirates we can't have nice things. To all those hoping for the tournament edition to be leaked it's that sort of attitude of why we can't have lan in the first place.
|
Russian Federation410 Posts
On June 14 2010 10:31 ViruX wrote:
Thanks to pirates we can't have nice things. To all those hoping for the tournament edition to be leaked it's that sort of attitude of why we can't have lan in the first place.
Nope, that's thanks to lawyers.
|
So, all of you on your high horse, what would you have us do? Sit back and play the game on Battle.net 2.0, accepting LAN as a lost cause?
The only way we're going to get LAN back is if we take it back. If Activision-Blizzard sees that people would pirate the game to recover the features they're withholding, maybe they would consider implementing them. If they don't, they don't deserve our money anyway (though I'll probably give mine to them regardless).
|
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.
|
By the way. Anybody who condemns people who pirate the LAN version of SC2, but used or supported iCCup is a hypocrite.
|
On June 14 2010 10:34 dew wrote:
So, all of you on your high horse, what would you have us do? Sit back and play the game on Battle.net 2.0, accepting LAN as a lost cause?
The only way we're going to get LAN back is if we take it back. If Activision-Blizzard sees that people would pirate the game to recover the features they're withholding, maybe they would consider implementing them. If they don't, they don't deserve our money anyway (though I'll probably give mine to them regardless).
Pirate the game so there's no money coming in so Blizzad won't support it, great
You're not some crusader for videogame rights you're just using something that Blizzard spent millions on without giving anything back. If they see people pirate the game because there was a very specific workaround with LAN play they will remove that workaround. If you will not play without LAN do not play. You're not forced to play SC2
|
Learn to read. I already said I'm giving them my money. I'm simply pirating the feature that they are withholding.
Besides, it will not be possible to remove the workaround. If they kill it with an update, people simply will not download the update and they will splinter the community even further.
|
This is all hearsay like the article states and don't take it as more than a grain of salt. The author isn't even sure since Blizzard said there won't be a LAN at all. So just wait until June 24th to see like the article says.
|
Damn these pirates! The economic crisis is all their fault, it has nothing to do with greedy CEOs who try to milk as much money as possible without thinking of the consequences!
By the way, I am a pirate. At the same time I have bought all Blizzard games since SC and played WoW for almost two years. However, I do not intend to buy SC2 though, at least not in its current state.
|
I honestly hope someone cracks sc2 so blizzard can just release lan... playing on battle.net to play someone two feet to your right and lagging like shit is stupid
|
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.
lol... if you think SCBW was not pirated... wow, I guess you are beyond help.
|
LAN for the public will probably never happen until someone makes a private server that manages to find a legal loophole to prevent lawsuits, and manages to surpass Bnet for e-Sports play.
Removing LAN has more to do with controlling e-Sports than preventing piracy. If e-Sports prefer to flock to private servers for whatever reason, then Blizzard loses. If everything still goes through Bnet, then Blizzard wins no matter how many sales they lost to pirates, because even a million pirated copies is a mosquito bite compared to the amount of revenue WoW alone brings.
|
On June 14 2010 10:16 artanis2 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 10:13 Bob300 wrote:
You can all play on the same router you know. There isn't any lag anymore I tried it myself. Everyone just needs to login to there own accounts. Have you ever been to a large lan party? I'm not talking about 10 people in a basement.
Thats what I thought you meant my bad, i had 7 computers running and no lag.
|
On June 14 2010 10:47 Zanez.smarty wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 10:36 artanis2 wrote:
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.
lol... if you think SCBW was not pirated... wow, I guess you are beyond help.
If that's what you think my post said, see the 2nd half of your post.
|
On June 14 2010 10:47 Zanez.smarty wrote:Show nested quote +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. lol... if you think SCBW was not pirated... wow, I guess you are beyond help.
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On June 14 2010 10:47 Zanez.smarty wrote:Show nested quote +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. 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?
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
This makes me hungry for info on how international prelims will be run, would I, for example, be able to participate in international prelims?
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
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.
|
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.
|
seems every1 will love blizz now, anyway if its true, great news
"haterz gonna love"
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
An international OSL for SC2.....so hyped already
|
This is extremely disappointing. I'm in the armed forces so I have to go for long periods without internet but I have access to my laptop. When I was deployed to Iraq, our ability to network our xboxes and play halo 2 was the only thing that helped us maintain our sanity. I know bliz wants to prevent piracy, but they are smart enough and large enough to come up with a way to do it without punishing their loyal fans that are buying the game. Truly disappointed.
|
good job blizzard in not alienating the korean scene and instead embracing and using their strengths to create a potentially amazing product. exciting stuff
|
HAHA
i recall people saying im being paranoid when i said that blizzard politics was just a plot to monopolize tournament market.
u naive people u!
|
On June 14 2010 12:52 Hann1bal wrote:This is extremely disappointing. I'm in the armed forces so I have to go for long periods without internet but I have access to my laptop. When I was deployed to Iraq, our ability to network our xboxes and play halo 2 was the only thing that helped us maintain our sanity. I know bliz wants to prevent piracy, but they are smart enough and large enough to come up with a way to do it without punishing their loyal fans that are buying the game. Truly disappointed.
Damn that does suck man I feel for you and this is a prime example of why people are pissed when they heard that Lan wasn't going to be included. It seems like a giant slap in the face to the average player or anyone who isn't up in the Pro leagues to find out they do in fact have a Lan setup but we just aren't allowed to have it because of Blizzards crazy power trip SC2 seems to have put them on.
|
This sounds pretty awesome to me.
|
|
|
On June 14 2010 06:20 Ideas wrote:i want LAN too though
ya.. we all do.. it was hard enough to get everyone's computers to show up in LAN in the dorm.. and to get everyone connected to battlenet would probably be impossible..
but i'd still rather have cheaters snuffed out 1000x more than LAN.
there's no point in being good at a game when cheaters run rampant.
|
I'm going to participate in that if I get the chance :D.
|
Anyone else think that pro gamers will find it hard to play on LAN pings after only being able to prac on bnet with its 125 (at best) ping? I know for one when i first loaded a map through the map editor it was so odd feeling no ping that it was actually detrimental to my macro and micro because my clicking was so used to having a delay.
|
Hallelujah! This is an epic day indeed.
|
On June 14 2010 13:15 danl9rm wrote:ya.. we all do..
I have a feeling that Blizzard will implement LAN through a patch a month or two after release.
|
Sad day for BW. It will be exciting to see the last BW OSLs in the next couple of years, knowing that each one may be the last. Heres hoping FantaSy or FlaSh can take down one of the remaining SC1 OSLs
Hurray for LAN though! Although players like Sea.Really/Seiya have said that will not continue progaming, I am really hoping the mechanical terrans of BW will eventually pick up SC2 and play. Up and coming prodigies such as baby with insane multi-task ability [FP views of the recent Ace vs Flash were silly to try and comprehend] combined with raw mechanics...we will see if the skill ceiling in SC2 has been lowered as much as many of us think it has been or if the multi-tasking time granted through the easier macro-ing will make for non-stop action instead of blob v blob army.
|
These a great news, i really like their approach to the lan issue. Subtle don't you think?
Blizz ftw.
|
i think that at some point Blizzard should implement a viewer into b.net so that you can watch the OSL finals live. perhaps even a list of announcers that you can choose from to listen to as well
|
I think regarding the LAN situation, it's an upgrade but still not satisfying. Can't say much right now though as it seems to be just rumor rather than news.
|
On June 14 2010 06:23 zrules wrote:Show nested quote +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. Sure it might be a neccessity for LAN at a tournament, but what if Blizzard staff are late to arrive? We hold the tournament until their flight arrives? That's pretty stupid...
There is just an activation code, I'm sure Blizzard isn't that selfish to withhold important information because a couple of representatives are not present.
|
On June 14 2010 13:15 danl9rm wrote:
but i'd still rather have cheaters snuffed out 1000x more than LAN.
there's no point in being good at a game when cheaters run rampant.
Hate to burst your bubble bro but hackers will find a way to implement hacks on SC2 within a very short period of time. The new Bnet2.0 only makes it more difficult. This won't even come close to touching the skill level of some of the most popular hack-makers out there who often times are far more intelligent than the programmers the company has working for them.
|
Guys, blizzard is not going to go after you using the inevitable lan hack in your house playing with your friends.
They would go after a professional tournament using such a hack which was the real concern. That any professional tournament was faced with either horrible pings and instability or to taint the legitimacy of their event. Blizzard has solved this problem, now let the pirates solve the other.
|
On June 14 2010 13:59 JustAnotherKnave wrote:
i think that at some point Blizzard should implement a viewer into b.net so that you can watch the OSL finals live. perhaps even a list of announcers that you can choose from to listen to as well
freaken genius. integrate esports and viewing it, and following it into the game itself, rather than useless shit like facebook.
they want to take over esports? well how about integrating it and making it accessible right when u log on? didn't think that one through did you, frank pierce/activision?
|
On a second thought, what is there for blizzard to lose if they implement lan? maybe 0.01% of their player base to ppl who lan over hamachi? If i want to pirate i can still DL the game and play the single player campaign or against AI.... All the good players and latest patchs require bnet. If Bnet is "so good that we wouldnt want to lan", then why would blizzard be "afraid" to include lan functionality?
What about internet cafe? There are millions of them around the world, how will those work?
|
On June 14 2010 14:12 Diminotoor wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 13:15 danl9rm wrote:
but i'd still rather have cheaters snuffed out 1000x more than LAN.
there's no point in being good at a game when cheaters run rampant. Hate to burst your bubble bro but hackers will find a way to implement hacks on SC2 within a very short period of time. The new Bnet2.0 only makes it more difficult. This won't even come close to touching the skill level of some of the most popular hack-makers out there who often times are far more intelligent than the programmers the company has working for them.
how did you get the secred IQ tests where this was proven?
by the way: I dont care if some people hack at all. they are having 100 times less fun than me
I also think that there never will be alot of hackers. because a) most people dont like it and b) if there are then its easyer to find out (finding popular hacks and making solutions against it is easyer).
so... just dont think too much about cheaters! theire not worth it.
|
even if blizzard doesnt implement lan someone somewhere is gonna find a way to hack it and enable lan anyway
|
"Blizzard staff will be present at tournaments to assist."
talk about securing profits by spending them.
|
On June 14 2010 14:24 waffling1 wrote:talk about securing profits by spending them.
I think contacting some trusted people over at the venues would be a much better idea. For example, Chill would be the "associate" in Canada.
|
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.
I think if you just continue to voice your dissatisfaction Blizzard will eventually listen, but threatening to pirate stuff while trash talking Blizzard isn't very helpful at all. Blizzard isn't a company to ignore it's player base. If theres stuff they can improve on that isn't harmful to the game, their standards, or integrity, they will do it if enough people ask for it with good reason.
As for the rumor itself, I'm super excited! A major sponsor is back to support SC2 at launch with a major tournament! I think SC2 will definitely evolve over the next few years/expansions so it'll be fun to watch the pro gamers adapt. At the very least Blizzard is doing it's best to make the transition from BW to SC2 easy for the fans, assuming BW stops sooner rather than later.
|
On June 14 2010 14:36 lolaloc wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 14:24 waffling1 wrote:"Blizzard staff will be present at tournaments to assist." talk about securing profits by spending them. I think contacting some trusted people over at the venues would be a much better idea. For example, Chill would be the "associate" in Canada.
I think they want to get their own insights, so they know what their investing in. maybe they learn a few things there
|
sc2: lan edition
seriously blizzard?
|
you guys seriously thought you would play tournaments over Bnet? It was 100% clear that there will be something like LAN for tournaments.
|
Braavos36374 Posts
3. The first OS2L will have prelimnaries from all over the world, and then the players will be gathered in Seoul for the Ro16.
Now that is exciting.
|
On June 14 2010 14:12 Diminotoor wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 13:15 danl9rm wrote:
but i'd still rather have cheaters snuffed out 1000x more than LAN.
there's no point in being good at a game when cheaters run rampant. Hate to burst your bubble bro but hackers will find a way to implement hacks on SC2 within a very short period of time. The new Bnet2.0 only makes it more difficult. This won't even come close to touching the skill level of some of the most popular hack-makers out there who often times are far more intelligent than the programmers the company has working for them.
Pretty much all hacks are client based : very easy to make and nearly impossible to prevents, nothing to do with the intelligence of the developers or hackers lmao.
|
On June 14 2010 14:55 Hot_Bid wrote:Show nested quote +3. The first OS2L will have prelimnaries from all over the world, and then the players will be gathered in Seoul for the Ro16. Now that is exciting.
Yeah, I am excited what would the comments be if IdrA picked orb to be in his group.
|
OS2L? O SHI--
I came a little.
OK, I lied. A lot.
|
On June 14 2010 15:12 lolaloc wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 14:55 Hot_Bid wrote:3. The first OS2L will have prelimnaries from all over the world, and then the players will be gathered in Seoul for the Ro16. Now that is exciting. Yeah, I am excited what would the comments be if IdrA picked orb to be in his group.
i imagine theyd only let people who qualify into the group selection
|
On June 14 2010 07:25 Inori wrote:
This is hilarious.
Instead of implementing a literally must-have features of a multi-player game, they are going to milk big money for the priviledge of using it.
How greedy can you get.
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.
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.
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"?
Nobody said this lol.
You guys realize that playing on iCCup is piracy just the same as this, right?
no isn't. Its only piracy if you don't own the game.
|
Oh Idra. Every single one of your post makes me laugh
|
pretty sure idra isn't a top 5 american player
|
On June 14 2010 15:27 Half wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 07:25 Inori wrote:
This is hilarious.
Instead of implementing a literally must-have features of a multi-player game, they are going to milk big money for the priviledge of using it.
How greedy can you get. 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.
Well the armored truck service that drives the server around indiana has to get paid along with the private army that will guard the software with their life at LAN events.
|
Show nested quote +
God, I hope they found a way to prevent this from getting leaked and Pirated...
This is impossible.
Skype Premium Edition. Or even WoW lol, private servers kind of suck. You can have pirated Starcraft 2 with everything broken and 300 ms.
|
On June 14 2010 15:17 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 15:12 lolaloc wrote:On June 14 2010 14:55 Hot_Bid wrote:3. The first OS2L will have prelimnaries from all over the world, and then the players will be gathered in Seoul for the Ro16. Now that is exciting. Yeah, I am excited what would the comments be if IdrA picked orb to be in his group. i imagine theyd only let people who qualify into the group selection
ahahaa orbs a good guy, fun to watch, fun to listen to, but assuming he makes a worldwide star league is quite a stretch at this point lol
|
Roffles
Pitcairn19291 Posts
On June 14 2010 15:17 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 15:12 lolaloc wrote:On June 14 2010 14:55 Hot_Bid wrote:3. The first OS2L will have prelimnaries from all over the world, and then the players will be gathered in Seoul for the Ro16. Now that is exciting. Yeah, I am excited what would the comments be if IdrA picked orb to be in his group. i imagine theyd only let people who qualify into the group selection
Am I the only one who found this funny?
|
On June 14 2010 15:43 Roffles wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 15:17 IdrA wrote:On June 14 2010 15:12 lolaloc wrote:On June 14 2010 14:55 Hot_Bid wrote:3. The first OS2L will have prelimnaries from all over the world, and then the players will be gathered in Seoul for the Ro16. Now that is exciting. Yeah, I am excited what would the comments be if IdrA picked orb to be in his group. i imagine theyd only let people who qualify into the group selection Am I the only one who found this funny?
Be funnier if it was MSL group selection process.
|
Lol read 3^ I think its one of those things that a lot of people didn't catch unless they read it 2-3 times lol
edit: Clearly the guy above didn't get it.
|
On June 14 2010 10:27 GodIsNotHere wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 10:23 artanis2 wrote:On June 14 2010 10:18 Zanez.smarty wrote:
Proof: LAN is now available for the circumstances it is most necessary, and people are already finding new justification to pirate it. Now the pirate children are getting boners because Blizz has a weakness in the system....
Sounds kinda like you have a boner for pirates. I'm not going to pirate the game, but I am going to find a way to have lan functionality at lan parties! Whether by server emulator, patched client, whatever.
God, I hope they found a way to prevent this from getting leaked and Pirated...
This is impossible. I couldn't have said it better myself. Seriously there is this idea that anyone using something pirated must be greedy/evil or something. Lets see I own , 1 copy of all warcraft games, 1 copy of Diablo1, Diablo2 + the expansion, 2 copys of starcraft/broodwars and a battle chest, and Ive played WoW for a few years.... YUP I really haven't supported Blizzard at all! Also yes I plan on getting a copy on release I have the collectors edition pre-ordered.
there's this other idea that because you've bought a few of their games, you're entitled to something special.
well, here's a cookie. 
nm, that's the best i can do
|
On June 14 2010 15:51 ZlaSHeR wrote:
Lol read 3^ I think its one of those things that a lot of people didn't catch unless they read it 2-3 times lol
edit: Clearly the guy above didn't get it.
Maybe I did "get it" but I just didn't care enough to let in on knowing that by typing a response so you'd know i got it.
|
I'm glad that Blizz have done SOMETHING to prevent the major cockfest that was the Bay Area LAN happening again.
|
On June 14 2010 16:06 Subversion wrote:
I'm glad that Blizz have done SOMETHING to prevent the major cockfest that was the Bay Area LAN happening again.
LOLOLOL At least our DC LAN got one or two girls hahahaha
|
|
|
On June 14 2010 10:38 dew wrote:
By the way. Anybody who condemns people who pirate the LAN version of SC2, but used or supported iCCup is a hypocrite.
Not if you are playing a paid copy of the game?
|
oh wow, blizzard is actually trying to rip everyone off and they dont even try to conceal it now.
OS2L is aweseome news though.
|
People still wonder why Blizzard puts No-Lan support in for the normal editions?
It cannot be any more obvious (and it's neither Activision nor Kotick lol).
|
This is going to be so freaking awesome! An OSL with westerners, and Blizzard confirming the fact that pro-lan exists (Which was obvious imo, theyre not stupid, no LAN is for piracy after all.)
|
I would so write an email to Blizzard demanding the LAN version and their precious staff, when i organize SC2 tournament for me and 3 of my buddies. The prize? Winner gets free beer from everyone, and the privilege of molesting blizzard greedy staff.
|
Great news, I figured they would have to do something like this to make big tournaments run smoothly. Good way to start off the launch of SC2 too.
Stop complaining about lack of lan support for the average joe, I have never been to a LAN that didn't have internet and neither have you (except that one guy who is reading this now).
The only problem I see is if you happen to be in a LAN when Bnet 2.0 is down for maintanance or some other unexpected reason, but it's not the end of the world. Go play something else while blizzard sorts it out.
|
On June 14 2010 18:08 Kolossus wrote:
I would so write an email to Blizzard demanding the LAN version and their precious staff, when i organize SC2 tournament for me and 3 of my buddies. The prize? Winner gets free beer from everyone, and the privilege of molesting blizzard greedy staff.
and you would be denied... ? so hilarious.
|
Awesome news! Blizzard really know what there doing
|
On June 14 2010 18:26 vT.sOel wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 18:08 Kolossus wrote:
I would so write an email to Blizzard demanding the LAN version and their precious staff, when i organize SC2 tournament for me and 3 of my buddies. The prize? Winner gets free beer from everyone, and the privilege of molesting blizzard greedy staff. and you would be denied... ? so hilarious.
Oh, aren't you presumptuous thinking you know the sexual preferences and fetishes of blizzards "tournament staff".
|
Pay 20euros to play in the qualifier server of your continent, like WoW tournaments.
Goodluck with this shit.
|
On June 14 2010 18:26 HeIios wrote:
Stop complaining about lack of lan support for the average joe, I have never been to a LAN that didn't have internet and neither have you (except that one guy who is reading this now).
The only problem I see is if you happen to be in a LAN when Bnet 2.0 is down for maintanance or some other unexpected reason, but it's not the end of the world. Go play something else while blizzard sorts it out.
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.
|
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
$10 says the professional edition will get leaked and cracked
|
United Arab Emirates492 Posts
On June 14 2010 06:17 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
3. The first OS2L will have prelimnaries from all over the world, and then the players will be gathered in Seoul for the Ro16.
l
Do you literally mean "all over the world", even for countries in middle-east :D?
|
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 +
|
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?
|
I love reading all these people saying that you have to choose this or that, or saying "if you don't want to play sc2 with the features it has then don't play it."
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
|
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 +
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.
|
On June 14 2010 15:41 Half wrote:Show nested quote +
God, I hope they found a way to prevent this from getting leaked and Pirated...
This is impossible. 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.
|
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?
|
On June 14 2010 19:54 SpaceChick wrote:Show nested quote +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?
Special attention for esports = removing features from non professional copies, that should be praised? Blizzard defenders are truly ridiculous.
|
there will be a special edition LAN support.
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.
|
Korea Air sponsor ))))) TLO will come inside a boeing like Flash
For the starcraft professional edition with lan i dont trust, it will be too easy to hack it or it must be very minor
|
On June 14 2010 18:36 Kolossus wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 18:26 vT.sOel wrote:On June 14 2010 18:08 Kolossus wrote:
I would so write an email to Blizzard demanding the LAN version and their precious staff, when i organize SC2 tournament for me and 3 of my buddies. The prize? Winner gets free beer from everyone, and the privilege of molesting blizzard greedy staff. and you would be denied... ? so hilarious. 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
|
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...
|
On June 14 2010 18:50 Acies wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 18:26 HeIios wrote:
Stop complaining about lack of lan support for the average joe, I have never been to a LAN that didn't have internet and neither have you (except that one guy who is reading this now).
The only problem I see is if you happen to be in a LAN when Bnet 2.0 is down for maintanance or some other unexpected reason, but it's not the end of the world. Go play something else while blizzard sorts it out. 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.
|
Honestly, I hope this LAN edition will leak and get cracked :p. Or better yet, I hope they'll end up patching in LAN into our regular version, possibly after peaking sales.
|
damn, you swedes get pretty good deals then.
|
Yep, it definitly says there's going to be an OS2L and Lan features for SC2.
|
Sounds good, and this is definitely great for keeping tournaments controlled and in-house. Honestly though, if Blizz is only avoiding LAN release due to piracy, it's a losing battle. I'm sure people over at pirate bay (or wherever) are already (if not finished) reverse-engineering SC2 to make their own working LAN, and then it will be available to the pirate community. With or without a functioning LAN from the get-go.
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.
|
Good news!!
I am so excited for the end of the month. Hopefully all these rumors prove to be true!
|
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.
|
On June 14 2010 22:21 Batch wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 18:50 Acies wrote:On June 14 2010 18:26 HeIios wrote:
Stop complaining about lack of lan support for the average joe, I have never been to a LAN that didn't have internet and neither have you (except that one guy who is reading this now).
The only problem I see is if you happen to be in a LAN when Bnet 2.0 is down for maintanance or some other unexpected reason, but it's not the end of the world. Go play something else while blizzard sorts it out. 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.
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.
|
rofl sc2 OSL prolly will be even more exclusive to foreigners than bw was
just, every single pro gamer you see now will turn into a fucking machine in sc2
there will be no way to catch up
|
I also doubt that even Sweden is going to be able to support it's lans of 11,000 to play games online simultaneously.
Well even if they would play simultaneously (people sleep, jack off under jackets etc) it shouldn't be a problem, I think it's something like 40gigabit per second.
But at least you guys in Australia have kangaroos...
[edit]
Oh and you have vegemite too, seriously :/.
|
On June 14 2010 23:24 Acies wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 22:21 Batch wrote:On June 14 2010 18:50 Acies wrote:On June 14 2010 18:26 HeIios wrote:
Stop complaining about lack of lan support for the average joe, I have never been to a LAN that didn't have internet and neither have you (except that one guy who is reading this now).
The only problem I see is if you happen to be in a LAN when Bnet 2.0 is down for maintanance or some other unexpected reason, but it's not the end of the world. Go play something else while blizzard sorts it out. 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. 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.
First I want to say that my post wasn't intended to be a brag post about Internet infrastructures, it was posted as a reply to the claim that you would need a big bandwidth connection to support medium sized LANs.
Secondly you mentioned Dreamhack. They would actually don't have any problems with their connections since they got a realy fat pipe shoveling data to and from the internet. If Blizzard provides larger LANs with a local Battle.net 2 proxy this would be a non problem since Dreamhack should qualify as being a large LAN.
Finaly I agree that it would be much better to avoid the long distance game data traveling and I think a LAN feature would be great but I understand Blizzards reasoning since they probably will sell at least twice as much games if they can avoid the game from being pirated. I would have done the same solution as Blizzard and don't blame them for doing so.
|
Stop being so naive. By forcing people to hack the system in order to allow functionality that should be in there for the paying customer you are not avoiding the game from being pirated, you are increasing the likely hood of it being pirated. I highly doubt no lan has anything to do with piracy. It seems more like a control issue.
The issue never was with these massive lans. The issue is with the small group of friends that are UNABLE to play with each other in the same building as there is no support for it. This has nothing to do with eSports or any grander competition. It's the little guy that gets screwed over. Unlike popular belief not everything has the capabilities or having 5+ people playing at the same time online. I actually find this quite funny. I remember when console games used to come with split screen and how awesome it was to just put in a disk and jam with some friends but now thanks to internet consoles have become simplified PCs lacking what made them great in the first place. It seems even PC games are going that way.
|
On June 15 2010 00:06 Batch wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 23:24 Acies wrote:On June 14 2010 22:21 Batch wrote:On June 14 2010 18:50 Acies wrote:On June 14 2010 18:26 HeIios wrote:
Stop complaining about lack of lan support for the average joe, I have never been to a LAN that didn't have internet and neither have you (except that one guy who is reading this now).
The only problem I see is if you happen to be in a LAN when Bnet 2.0 is down for maintanance or some other unexpected reason, but it's not the end of the world. Go play something else while blizzard sorts it out. 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. 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. First I want to say that my post wasn't intended to be a brag post about Internet infrastructures, it was posted as a reply to the claim that you would need a big bandwidth connection to support medium sized LANs. Secondly you mentioned Dreamhack. They would actually don't have any problems with their connections since they got a realy fat pipe shoveling data to and from the internet. If Blizzard provides larger LANs with a local Battle.net 2 proxy this would be a non problem since Dreamhack should qualify as being a large LAN. Finaly I agree that it would be much better to avoid the long distance game data traveling and I think a LAN feature would be great but I understand Blizzards reasoning since they probably will sell at least twice as much games if they can avoid the game from being pirated. I would have done the same solution as Blizzard and don't blame them for doing so.
I guess that post came off more defensive than I intended.
In my city, there are two major lans with around 300-400 attendees. There are also many smaller lans. The reality is SC2 will be unplayable due to lag there.
In my hometown there is a regular lan with 100-200 attendees with no internet at all. You will not even be able to watch replays at that lan.
Many rural areas are lucky to get 56K dialup. For them LAN was the only option for multiplayer.
The SEA Bnet server will be located in Singapore. When I ping singapore the latency is roughly 230ms. For some it is 400ms. A LAN offers sub10ms pings. That is a play experience that bnet2 cannot match no matter how many bells and whistles they throw in.
Furthermore, it is ahistorical to think this will increase sales letalone double them.
Oblivion is a single player game. There is no multiplayer code for it whatsoever yet there is a lan crack for multiplayer. It is not the best multiplayer experience but for the efforts of a single person on a single-player game it is an accomplishment that goes to show how futile excluding lan is.
Ubisoft requires all their new games to be online activated. What ubisoft game has not been successfully cracked?
What game in history has not been successfully cracked?
It is naive to think you can the first person ever to stop piracy and plain foolish to think that making the game experience for legitimate customers worse will increase sales.
|
I get your point that LAN is needed to get a pleasant gaming experience when using dail up connections. I didn't realise that people still used dail up connections to any greater extent.
I guess aussies are the ones who got the worst relative location to the Battle.net 2.0 servers and I feel bad for you.
On June 15 2010 00:34 Acies wrote:
What game in history has not been successfully cracked?
It is naive to think you can the first person ever to stop piracy and plain foolish to think that making the game experience for legitimate customers worse will increase sales.
Blizzard don't need to completely stop the game from being cracked. They will need to make it troublesome to play a pirated version and this way they sell more copies of their game.
Once again, I would very much like to see LAN included but I understand the reason why Blizzard wants to keep it out.
|
On June 15 2010 01:55 Batch wrote:
Blizzard don't need to completely stop the game from being cracked. They will need to make it troublesome to play a pirated version and this way they sell more copies of their game.
Once again, I would very much like to see LAN included but I understand the reason why Blizzard wants to keep it out.
You don't understand. The game WILL be cracked and so will the bnet. This would mean that the people that play the cracked version will have access to lan while the ones that play the legit version will not. How is that going to make more sales? It's the exact same logic that is destroying ubisoft products.
The only possible increase in sales would be an extreme short term basis.
|
Also, in the case of SC2 there would be really developed communities, tournaments and ladders(Garena etc) ready to kick off day of release. Not to mention China. If they can delay those for just some weeks they will sell a crapload more copies. Quite understandable decision.
|
I predict 2 preliminaries before a reverse-engineered crack of the LAN client is released. 3 before iCCup has a BNet2.0 server of their own. Maybe 5 before iCCup BNet starts being better than Blizzards.
That is preliminaries as in one place, one time, not a whole round of prelims for a copmlete starleague.
Goes to show that people willing to go the extra mile to make features people actually want will get the customers, I guess.
|
On June 14 2010 06:20 Tone_ wrote:
Sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet.
If one pro edition were to get out on the web wouldn't that shitrape all of the no LAN anti piracy altogether though?
the internet consists of anon, if anon wants Lan for private people, it shall be.
I get your point that LAN is needed to get a pleasant gaming experience when using dail up connections. blizzard has made it so that up to 16 people from one location can play sc2 off one location. No more, so when you go to say a nationwide lan event and 1500 people play sc2 in addition to a tournament they either
1. will have to get blizzard to help host a low budget tournament or
2. Pirate it.
Guess what will end up being the widespread "thing to do"?
yea it will be easy to take the pirate route especially with the current Peer 2 peer community and as Reloaded says, if you like the game buy it. We did.
In the end it isnt about piracy, its about freedom. The thought of playing the game you want, when you want, whenever you want and if i want to host a local "in town" 30 man lan event at my high school.
I cba to ask blizzard to have someone show up to set it up. Its tedious, will take years to set up and probably costs money. Why shell out a few bucks when there is a doable solution on the intarwebz?
|
Piracy is what got us here in the first place, I hate the pirates more than I hate Blizzard for not providing LAN.
Chat channels .. that's something I can't understand not having, hell If I was Blizzard I'd do everything in my power to protect my investment, and if not having LAN is the price then so be it.
|
On June 15 2010 02:05 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 01:55 Batch wrote:
Blizzard don't need to completely stop the game from being cracked. They will need to make it troublesome to play a pirated version and this way they sell more copies of their game.
Once again, I would very much like to see LAN included but I understand the reason why Blizzard wants to keep it out. You don't understand. The game WILL be cracked and so will the bnet. This would mean that the people that play the cracked version will have access to lan while the ones that play the legit version will not. How is that going to make more sales? It's the exact same logic that is destroying ubisoft products. The only possible increase in sales would be an extreme short term basis.
If you re-read what I wrote you might understand that I never questioned that the game will be cracked. It will be. But if the crack can be delayed as long as possible and be as troublesome as possible to use then they will sell much more copies of the game the first few months.
They might also be able buy themselves some time to develop Battle.net 2.0 to a state where it gives an additional value to gamers which makes them want to play there instead of on pirated servers. If they get to this stage then they won't need to think about pirated games since they only would be used to play on LANs.
I didn't get what you meant with the last part about the logic that destroys ubisoft products.
|
I just love how people have such a feeling of entitlement. Blizzard knows that someone will leak the lan edition, that is guaranteed. So I take it they will do everything in their power to make it impossible to hack. I guess you could make it pretty hard seeing as having it easy to use, and people friendly does not matter as it will be pro only.
Hate the anon thing, I just hate it.
|
Am I the only one who thinks blizzard is going to eventually release LAN to the public?
I mean obviously not immediately b/c they believe(falsely, I think) that if they can prevent people from cracking their game for a few months that they will get more sales.
I would guess that a few patches in they will add in LAN support along with chat and whatever else they can cram in there. They probably just believe its in their best interest to do it this way.
To those who think Blizzard believes piracy can be prevented indefinitely... do you really believe they are that naive? Piracy is like death and taxes. Its gonna happen one way or another. They are just trying to mitigate the losses.
|
On June 14 2010 15:41 Half wrote:Show nested quote +
God, I hope they found a way to prevent this from getting leaked and Pirated...
This is impossible. Skype Premium Edition. Or even WoW lol, private servers kind of suck. You can have pirated Starcraft 2 with everything broken and 300 ms.
You kidding? SC2 doesn't do any processing on the server. It's basically 100% packet bounce with checksum. Where's that magic 300ms ping going to come from on my LAN?
|
Ubisoft has been going crazy with DRM that makes it so difficult for the customer that buys the game to actually play the game but the guy that cracks it can play it easily. See latest Settlers game.
Batch I get what you saying I'm sorry for misunderstanding that point about being cracked but the underlying logic is flawed. If the game started out with enough value to make it worth buying instead of getting a cracked version there would be increased sales. Instead what you are saying is that they are removing functionality to delay their game being cracked so they can actually produce a product that will be worth buying? That just doesn't seem like a solid basis for anything.
I remember an interview with the guy from valve(Gabe something I believe). Where he mentions how Russia has tons of piracy but valve took the approach of releasing their games at the same time in Russia as everywhere else and thus actually increased sales. Where as other developers did insane DRM or didn't release until way way later in Russia. To me this seems the approach EVERYONE should be taking on piracy. There will be pirates but more people will pay money for something that is worth paying money. That's been blizzard's moto forever but seems it has changed.
I'm sorry if this post is extremely hard to follow but I'm kinda tired ;P. I'll try get more point across better later
|
On June 15 2010 02:41 Numy wrote:
If the game started out with enough value to make it worth buying instead of getting a cracked version there would be increased sales. Instead what you are saying is that they are removing functionality to delay their game being cracked so they can actually produce a product that will be worth buying?
I completely agree with you on this one. But as the gaming industry looks these days they need to get out the games as fast as possible and fix them or add content to them after the release.
Best scenario would be if Battle.net 2.0 was too awesome for anyone to even consider playing anywhere else.
|
What they should do is put LAN in a couple months after retail hits. And right now they should tell us exactly when it will happen so we can feel some reassurance.
|
I agree the points of pirates justifying their right to pirate a game if it lacks a feature. If you're not happy with the game, don't buy it. If you think you have a right to pirate something just because it's too expensive for how good you may think it is then you're completely wrong. The alternative is to wait until the price drops, then perhaps it will meet your requirements.
|
That they can say Korean Air is the first sponsor this early makes me suspicious of this information but Im hoping that its true but this is all fantastic news!
|
That they can say Korean Air is the first sponsor this early makes me suspicious of this information but Im hoping that its true but this is all fantastic news!
Well, the event is already legitimately confirmed to be taking place in the Korean Air hangar...so it's not that big of a leap.
|
On June 14 2010 14:22 waffling1 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 13:59 JustAnotherKnave wrote:
i think that at some point Blizzard should implement a viewer into b.net so that you can watch the OSL finals live. perhaps even a list of announcers that you can choose from to listen to as well freaken genius. integrate esports and viewing it, and following it into the game itself, rather than useless shit like facebook. they want to take over esports? well how about integrating it and making it accessible right when u log on? didn't think that one through did you, frank pierce/activision?
yes it is genius. but i hardly call this taking over esports, just Blizzard lording over SC2, and like duh - they should. moreover, i find it very very smart to maintain Korea as the capital of the esport; this is the honor Korea deserves for making BW the success it is/was. Korea will be for pro-SC2 what England and the Premier League is for soccer.
and to be honest, i'd rather have access to proSC2 matches through the game itself than what i currently have to do which is through some TL's livestream. At least with Blizzard i know that ads will actually be targeted at me instead of swill like "Hot in Cleveland". and i can't overstate my desire for english commentators LIVE
|
I don't think people who pirate software assume they have a "right" to do so. People toss that word around like it means something way too often. Pirates just do what they want and rationalize it for public acceptance. It's the same with anyone who does something illegal/immoral, we just want what we want and don't care how we get it.
|
what countries will have qualifiers?
|
Great news about the OS2L, but we still need proper LAN functionallity. Part of the whole LAN feeling for me is to be disconnected, completely offline for once. Not supporting LAN is just stupid.
But i guess there will be some sort of fix or crack or "offline pirate server" for those of us who still goes to LAN partys without an internet connection.
|
On June 15 2010 02:37 artanis2 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 15:41 Half wrote:
God, I hope they found a way to prevent this from getting leaked and Pirated...
This is impossible. Skype Premium Edition. Or even WoW lol, private servers kind of suck. You can have pirated Starcraft 2 with everything broken and 300 ms. You kidding? SC2 doesn't do any processing on the server. It's basically 100% packet bounce with checksum. Where's that magic 300ms ping going to come from on my LAN?
I'm just wondering, are you just saying that or do you actually know anything about SC2 server structure.
I have utmost respect for Crackers and even distributors. I have zero for people who just want free stuff.
|
Activision-Blizzard wrote:
On the occasion in Seoul at an OSL in the Korean Air hangar when we had the greatest reception of Starcraft 2's life and the TL.net community slayed me mercilessly for not giving them features that were commonplace in 1998, I, Bobby Kotick, said: ‘The take was terrific but the fans killed me. I cried all the way to the bank.
There is only one language that they understand now; money. Korean Air put up the cash to host a big event and Blizzard's eyes went wide with dollar signs and they were more than happy to give lan to them.
The only way they will give us lan is if we vote with our dollars. It's very simple, really. In fact, dont steal it either, because then you give them something to blame it on that isnt themselves.
|
Seems like OGN deciding to go to the table with Gretech is paying off.
|
LAN is such an important block of LAN party culture that I can't see how Blizzard wouldn't eventually add LAN support to their game. It could be soon, even before the first expansion or after a couple of years at the latest.
But of course Blizzard doesn't want us to think that there will be a LAN implemented soon since people would just start to wait for it to come and then "the evil pirates" would raise and pirate the game without paying a penny. That way, more people will be buying it as soon as the game is being released.
|
uh didnt you guys already hear of the "SC2 Professional edition".. which will be sold only to Tournament organizers, which has LAN enabled.. Thats how this will work in Korea.
That way, they keep the piracy down because they will only have acouple hundred LAN serial keys available, but still get to have LAN's for the major events.
Still lame but it quells all the complaining in this thread so far.
|
Since now, I can visualize the hordes of hackers uniting under one banner, to crack and enable the game for the masses. Such sight does soothe my rebellious heart.
|
There is no way the "Professional" edition can support even a modest professional "scene" and not show up on torrent sites almost instantly. Right now this does't make a lot of sense.
|
they better be getting ready to crack this thing so we all get lan during this down time
|
yes special edition lan for tourney
|
On June 15 2010 09:49 fantomex wrote:
There is no way the "Professional" edition can support even a modest professional "scene" and not show up on torrent sites almost instantly. Right now this does't make a lot of sense.
Yeh have fun copying all the directories to a disc while a blizzard employee is running the server.
|
On June 15 2010 11:09 Baarn wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 09:49 fantomex wrote:
There is no way the "Professional" edition can support even a modest professional "scene" and not show up on torrent sites almost instantly. Right now this does't make a lot of sense. Yeh have fun copying all the directories to a disc while a blizzard employee is running the server.
Not to mention if they have CD keys (which they will) that there are only ~100 to 1000 CDkeys made, therefor if you get one banned, it can be traced down..
all blizzard games never make it on torrents other than singleplayer because of CDkeys anyways, I dont see how a LAN version would be any different, if not more secure due to such low number of keys given out.
|
On June 14 2010 06:25 Lightswarm wrote:
wtf. massive catering to the asian servers. i mean, clan wars and tournaments like CSL (for the casual gamers) will most likely have to use bnet 2.0. I just dont see this "Professional Edition" spreading to the foreign community (at least not in the forseeable future).
PS: If they have lan functionality and gives it to the chinese (who hosted tournaments like stars war), wont the chinese just hack the shit out of it anyways? just saying blizzard, wtf
Yeah its pretty fucking stupid, give lan to everyone or dont put it in the fucking game.
pretty simple concept
|
This means Blizzard justifying no-LAN by saying "the code isn't there, we didn't remove it" is BS. Let everyone play on LAN!
|
Why are Blizzard staff at all tournaments? Oh yeah, because you have to pay them to have a tournament now. No more tournaments for fun, or giant LAN get-togethers.
|
People in China, of which a majority only make 120$ a month, are going to have 2 options if LAN is installed in b.net:
1.Pay a large sum of money to get the game. Money that is in short supply.
2.Use blizzard made LAN to get the game free.
What do you think they will chose?
Is there a better way to get these people to buy SC2? What bliz server only services could they add? Ihmo, LAN parties are dying out and internet is getting better every year. There is no reason to go back in progress.
|
Looks like I'll have to protest their money making policies by not buying the game until they added lan, chat channel and allow us to make room names and everything that made their other games great.
|
I'm really excited for this, because even though it's not that much, it's really the camel's nose or something like that (i don't remember the figure of speech very well, honestly). We'll just see legitimate SC2 being played on BNet, and pirated LAN being played offline after a crack comes out. Kickass.
|
Are you serious? What we've gotten for free as an agreed upon feature for all previous blizzard games, will now cost approximately x to the power of monetary greed and 'supply and demand' ideology?
I think I need to embolden this:
ActivisonBlizzard is not Blizzard.
Truly just the idea of ActiBlizz doing this proves where the future of our beloved game is going.. You've heard 'The Boss' say it, they're going to milk us for Every Penny, unless it's fought for..
Just sayin' Just sayin..
|
On June 15 2010 12:06 Kraz.Del wrote:
People in China, of which a majority only make 120$ a month, are going to have 2 options if LAN is installed in b.net:
1.Pay a large sum of money to get the game. Money that is in short supply.
2.Use blizzard made LAN to get the game free.
What do you think they will chose?
Is there a better way to get these people to buy SC2? What bliz server only services could they add? Ihmo, LAN parties are dying out and internet is getting better every year. There is no reason to go back in progress.
Back in progress? One doesn't exclude the other you ignorant fool.
|
LAN parties are dying out and internet is getting better every year. There is no reason to go back in progress.
this is so unbelievably untrue it's shocking
|
Since it seems Blizzard is only making LAN exclusively, this will lead to eventual cracks at the game. Someone will make a hacked version of SC2, so we can LAN. It will spread like wildfire. Blizzard will have no choice but to make LAN available. Its going to happen.
|
On June 15 2010 09:49 fantomex wrote:
There is no way the "Professional" edition can support even a modest professional "scene" and not show up on torrent sites almost instantly. Right now this does't make a lot of sense.
Well most likely each version of the professional edition given out to prohouses or tournament organisers will be unique so blizzard can identify where the leak comes from. This will make those that receive the game paranoid to avoid being the one liable for any leak.
|
On June 15 2010 14:41 Acies wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 09:49 fantomex wrote:
There is no way the "Professional" edition can support even a modest professional "scene" and not show up on torrent sites almost instantly. Right now this does't make a lot of sense. Well most likely each version of the professional edition given out to prohouses or tournament organisers will be unique so blizzard can identify where the leak comes from. This will make those that receive the game paranoid to avoid being the one liable for any leak.
Still, it's only a matter of time
|
On June 15 2010 12:50 Prophecy3 wrote:
Are you serious? What we've gotten for free as an agreed upon feature for all previous blizzard games, will now cost approximately x to the power of monetary greed and 'supply and demand' ideology?
I think I need to embolden this:
ActivisonBlizzard is not Blizzard.
Truly just the idea of ActiBlizz doing this proves where the future of our beloved game is going.. You've heard 'The Boss' say it, they're going to milk us for Every Penny, unless it's fought for..
Just sayin' Just sayin..
You're right, Activision Blizzard isn't Blizzard. Blizzards actually a subsidiary of Activision Blizzard.
PM Profile Quote #
People in China, of which a majority only make 120$ a month, are going to have 2 options if LAN is installed in b.net:
The people making 120$ a month didnt really play Starcraft either.
Really, if they want to ensure this doesn't get pirated, they just tag every Processional edition with a unique serial. Anyone leaks it is going to have to face a swarm of lawyers and even law enforcement.
|
On June 15 2010 14:47 USn wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 14:41 Acies wrote:On June 15 2010 09:49 fantomex wrote:
There is no way the "Professional" edition can support even a modest professional "scene" and not show up on torrent sites almost instantly. Right now this does't make a lot of sense. Well most likely each version of the professional edition given out to prohouses or tournament organisers will be unique so blizzard can identify where the leak comes from. This will make those that receive the game paranoid to avoid being the one liable for any leak. Still, it's only a matter of time
Yup.LAN/Bnet getting cracked is as certain as Amen in church
all blizzard games never make it on torrents other than singleplayer because of CDkeys anyways
What? Every Blizzard multiplayer game is hacked. There are private Bnet for war3, diablo, WoW whatever you want... and they are all availible on torrent sites.
|
the best thing to do against piracy is make the best possible product you can available as easily as possible.
if people get better features or a more carefree experience pirating. they will. blizzard's best bet is to just include all these features.
besides. people follow the pros.
if all the pros are contracted to only play on battle.net or licensed lan servers. everyone else would play there too.
|
It's not a LAN like you think of LAN. It's a dedicated server. It's like Blizzard WoW TR but for Star 2. That's not up most of the year. So HF downloading a torrent that will still have to go through auth servers and put you on a tournament realm that might not be up for you to connect to.
|
On June 15 2010 15:15 Baarn wrote:
It's not a LAN like you think of LAN. It's a dedicated server. It's like Blizzard WoW TR but for Star 2. That's not up most of the year. So HF downloading a torrent that will still have to go through auth servers and put you on a tournament realm that might not be up for you to connect to.
source on that would be nice.
|
Man exciting news. I think that the whole pirating thing is not gonna be a big deal considering the fact that these tourni versions with LAN capability will be safeguarded.
|
On June 15 2010 13:47 Kolossus wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 12:06 Kraz.Del wrote:
People in China, of which a majority only make 120$ a month, are going to have 2 options if LAN is installed in b.net:
1.Pay a large sum of money to get the game. Money that is in short supply.
2.Use blizzard made LAN to get the game free.
What do you think they will chose?
Is there a better way to get these people to buy SC2? What bliz server only services could they add? Ihmo, LAN parties are dying out and internet is getting better every year. There is no reason to go back in progress. Back in progress? One doesn't exclude the other you ignorant fool.
whoaa there captain.
if he was, say, an ignorant fool, what would prevent him from saying such things?
an apology wouldn't be outta line.
|
On June 15 2010 15:19 MavercK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 15:15 Baarn wrote:
It's not a LAN like you think of LAN. It's a dedicated server. It's like Blizzard WoW TR but for Star 2. That's not up most of the year. So HF downloading a torrent that will still have to go through auth servers and put you on a tournament realm that might not be up for you to connect to. source on that would be nice.
I'm just carrying over the conversation going on in the thread associated with the thing the OP linked. Also I think Blizzard has made it very clear they aren't including LAN functionality at all in Starcraft 2.
|
Excuse me, but why the hell do I have to have an internet connection to play a multiplayer game, why can't my buddies and I just LAN up? I really want to have faith in Blizzard/ActiBlizz, but this is just frustrating and stupid. They are going to destroy a magnificent legacy of small groups of smelly nerds locked away in the dungeons that are their parent's basements, furiously competing with each other for the position of Alpha Nerd. This was my child hood. If they destroy any possibility of this tradition continuing, either through the complete destruction of LAN capabilities in the base consumer package, or the lack of a new suitable replacement, I'm going to boycott this company till the grave.
|
On June 15 2010 15:15 Baarn wrote:
It's not a LAN like you think of LAN. It's a dedicated server. It's like Blizzard WoW TR but for Star 2. That's not up most of the year. So HF downloading a torrent that will still have to go through auth servers and put you on a tournament realm that might not be up for you to connect to.
I'm pretty sure it's like this too. Dedicated servers for the individual tournaments are like LAN, but not. This way they can shut down the servers after the tournament's are over. The source in the OP even talks about dedicated servers like WoW so I'm not sure why people all of a sudden ruled that out for some LAN they think they can pirate.
|
On June 15 2010 15:40 Misanthrope wrote:
Excuse me, but why the hell do I have to have an internet connection to play a multiplayer game, why can't my buddies and I just LAN up? I really want to have faith in Blizzard/ActiBlizz, but this is just frustrating and stupid. They are going to destroy a magnificent legacy of small groups of smelly nerds locked away in the dungeons that are their parent's basements, furiously competing with each other for the position of Alpha Nerd. This was my child hood. If they destroy any possibility of this tradition continuing, either through the complete destruction of LAN capabilities in the base consumer package, or the lack of a new suitable replacement, I'm going to boycott this company till the grave.
Nice description of Utopia... that being smelly nerds competing furiously for the position of Alpha Nerd. Thanks you for the post.
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
Expect a cracked "Professional edition" on torrents at day 2.
I wonder what's the point then? No really, I know it will be pirated, you know it will be pirated, everyone knows it will be pirated, since everyone knows why the heck not include LAN in the retail version?
|
The idea is to prevent "Day One" piracy. The idea being that if you can play multiplayer without paying for the game on day one of release, you're more likely to pirate the game than if you have to wait until October for the multiplayer crack.
|
i suppose this is gonna happen in mlg as well. explains why sunrise was so confident
|
On June 15 2010 04:47 JustAnotherKnave wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 14:22 waffling1 wrote:On June 14 2010 13:59 JustAnotherKnave wrote:
i think that at some point Blizzard should implement a viewer into b.net so that you can watch the OSL finals live. perhaps even a list of announcers that you can choose from to listen to as well freaken genius. integrate esports and viewing it, and following it into the game itself, rather than useless shit like facebook. they want to take over esports? well how about integrating it and making it accessible right when u log on? didn't think that one through did you, frank pierce/activision? yes it is genius. but i hardly call this taking over esports, just Blizzard lording over SC2, and like duh - they should. moreover, i find it very very smart to maintain Korea as the capital of the esport; this is the honor Korea deserves for making BW the success it is/was. Korea will be for pro-SC2 what England and the Premier League is for soccer.and to be honest, i'd rather have access to proSC2 matches through the game itself than what i currently have to do which is through some TL's livestream. At least with Blizzard i know that ads will actually be targeted at me instead of swill like "Hot in Cleveland". and i can't overstate my desire for english commentators LIVE
Thx for making me laugh.
Im still boycotting so I cant say anything ontopic.
User was warned for this post
|
On June 14 2010 06:27 moopie wrote:Show nested quote +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 do you figure? if there's LAN that only blizzard is allowed to use for official blizzard tournaments how the hell does that help the actual playerbase who have wanted LAN features to play with friends or at local LAN parties? this won't put an end to anything, other than showing that Blizzard did take the time to code LAN for sc2, but they don't trust the playerbase with it.
Don't misunderstand Blizzard's decision; it's not meant to help LAN parties or playing with friends. It is a good compromise to circumvent piracy, but certainly not an effective one since one can still pirate it and basically play SC2 for free using VPNs (likely to be their main concern with the way WC3 is currently going in that particular scene).
I think it's safe to say that it's far more profitable and prudent not to openly trust the players with features that can be manipulated into playing the game for free. By having two different versions, they set a limit to how much of the game can be exploited.
|
On June 14 2010 11:44 xtfftc wrote: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.
Garena will survive just off all the Wc3/Dota/CoD and CS games going on. They dont need SC2
|
No, but they certainly want SC2 to grow.
|
But that wont be possible with Blizzards new policy. Say good bye to good latency play, and get used to your 300 + ping
|
On June 16 2010 02:05 shinigami wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 06:27 moopie wrote: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 do you figure? if there's LAN that only blizzard is allowed to use for official blizzard tournaments how the hell does that help the actual playerbase who have wanted LAN features to play with friends or at local LAN parties? this won't put an end to anything, other than showing that Blizzard did take the time to code LAN for sc2, but they don't trust the playerbase with it. Don't misunderstand Blizzard's decision; it's not meant to help LAN parties or playing with friends. It is a good compromise to circumvent piracy, but certainly not an effective one since one can still pirate it and basically play SC2 for free using VPNs (likely to be their main concern with the way WC3 is currently going in that particular scene). I think it's safe to say that it's far more profitable and prudent not to openly trust the players with features that can be manipulated into playing the game for free. By having two different versions, they set a limit to how much of the game can be exploited.
...I'm aware of that (check my other reply later on page 3 of this thread). This was a reply to PanzerDragoon who wrote that this "should put an end to LAN crybabying", as it the people who wanted LAN wanted it for Blizzard tournaments.
|
LAN partys are from the 90s. When we didnt have good internet, like we do now.
Jesus, get over it, we are in 2010.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On June 16 2010 06:03 Thorgrim wrote:
LAN partys are from the 90s. When we didnt have good internet, like we do now.
Jesus, get over it, we are in 2010.
...
Yes, because clearly Scandinavia is representative of fucking Australia/South Africa/Peru/China/Russia.
|
On June 15 2010 20:10 _EmIL_ wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 04:47 JustAnotherKnave wrote:On June 14 2010 14:22 waffling1 wrote:On June 14 2010 13:59 JustAnotherKnave wrote:
i think that at some point Blizzard should implement a viewer into b.net so that you can watch the OSL finals live. perhaps even a list of announcers that you can choose from to listen to as well freaken genius. integrate esports and viewing it, and following it into the game itself, rather than useless shit like facebook. they want to take over esports? well how about integrating it and making it accessible right when u log on? didn't think that one through did you, frank pierce/activision? yes it is genius. but i hardly call this taking over esports, just Blizzard lording over SC2, and like duh - they should. moreover, i find it very very smart to maintain Korea as the capital of the esport; this is the honor Korea deserves for making BW the success it is/was. Korea will be for pro-SC2 what England and the Premier League is for soccer.and to be honest, i'd rather have access to proSC2 matches through the game itself than what i currently have to do which is through some TL's livestream. At least with Blizzard i know that ads will actually be targeted at me instead of swill like "Hot in Cleveland". and i can't overstate my desire for english commentators LIVE Thx for making me laugh. Im still boycotting so I cant say anything ontopic. User was warned for this post
Well that sucks for you. You can miss out on a good game but I am going to buy it and enjoy it.
This OSL + tournament LAN is good it almost sounds likle people would rather have it either have absolutely no LAN at all even for tournaments or have it for all. Your not gonna get both so at least be happy with this (assuming its true).
|
On June 16 2010 06:07 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 06:03 Thorgrim wrote:
LAN partys are from the 90s. When we didnt have good internet, like we do now.
Jesus, get over it, we are in 2010. ... Yes, because clearly Scandinavia is representative of fucking Australia/South Africa/Peru/China/Russia.
You have a point, but Blizzard cant make everyone happy and make money at the same time.
|
On June 16 2010 06:56 Thorgrim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 06:07 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 16 2010 06:03 Thorgrim wrote:
LAN partys are from the 90s. When we didnt have good internet, like we do now.
Jesus, get over it, we are in 2010. ... Yes, because clearly Scandinavia is representative of fucking Australia/South Africa/Peru/China/Russia. You have a point, but Blizzard cant make everyone happy and make money at the same time.
well nearly all tournaments for almost any game are at lan centers. People still use lan.
|
A Blizzard dude coming to an approved tournament, running a LAN capable mini Battle.net server on his laptop. It's quite the obvious way to handle things when you want a monopoly over serious tournaments. Has this been talked about for months, or did I just think about it by myself? It doesn't surprise me either way.
|
If it's standalone LAN though, it would just be a matter of time before it gets leaked and cracked.
And we would be back to square 1, where the pirated version has more features than the legitimate.
|
On June 16 2010 06:07 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 06:03 Thorgrim wrote:
LAN partys are from the 90s. When we didnt have good internet, like we do now.
Jesus, get over it, we are in 2010. ... Yes, because clearly Scandinavia is representative of fucking Australia/South Africa/Peru/China/Russia.
Not to mention the fact that LANs are not only about playing on lan. They about socializing and meeting the people you play with WHILE you play with them. I thought the community realized how important the social aspect of gaming is based on how shit bnet 2.0 has dealt with that aspect. How can you bitch about bnet 2 and say that LAN is unimportant when they are based on the same fundamentals.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On June 16 2010 08:24 Scorch wrote:
A Blizzard dude coming to an approved tournament, running a LAN capable mini Battle.net server on his laptop. It's quite the obvious way to handle things when you want a monopoly over serious tournaments. Has this been talked about for months, or did I just think about it by myself? It doesn't surprise me either way.
It's how WoW tournaments have been handled for a long time, which I think has caused all but the biggest tournaments to say "fuck it, not worth the effort".
On June 16 2010 06:56 Thorgrim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 06:07 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 16 2010 06:03 Thorgrim wrote:
LAN partys are from the 90s. When we didnt have good internet, like we do now.
Jesus, get over it, we are in 2010. ... Yes, because clearly Scandinavia is representative of fucking Australia/South Africa/Peru/China/Russia. You have a point, but Blizzard cant make everyone happy and make money at the same time.
Steam can, apparently (LAN after authentication).
|
On June 17 2010 06:14 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 08:24 Scorch wrote:
A Blizzard dude coming to an approved tournament, running a LAN capable mini Battle.net server on his laptop. It's quite the obvious way to handle things when you want a monopoly over serious tournaments. Has this been talked about for months, or did I just think about it by myself? It doesn't surprise me either way. It's how WoW tournaments have been handled for a long time, which I think has caused all but the biggest tournaments to say "fuck it, not worth the effort". Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 06:56 Thorgrim wrote:On June 16 2010 06:07 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 16 2010 06:03 Thorgrim wrote:
LAN partys are from the 90s. When we didnt have good internet, like we do now.
Jesus, get over it, we are in 2010. ... Yes, because clearly Scandinavia is representative of fucking Australia/South Africa/Peru/China/Russia. You have a point, but Blizzard cant make everyone happy and make money at the same time. Steam can, apparently (LAN after authentication).
I don't play other video games, but how is steam? Has the code that authenticates LAN been cracked yet?
I seem to remember a lot of people saying that even LAN after authentication is not good as they still can't play unless they have the internet in the first place.
--------------------
On topic. I've always thought this scenario would play out, I just thought they'd offer it in a more scalable fashion. Support LAN up to 8/16/32/64/128 at once. Hook this little thing up to the network and the games will run through it, can support up to 8 players for 100 bucks, 16 for 180, 300 for 32, etc. Amounts to everyone kicking in 10 bucks the first time.
|
LAN on steam doesn't need to be cracked; LAN is a SC thing and most users who have steam have stable internet connections.
|
It's how WoW tournaments have been handled for a long time, which I think has caused all but the biggest tournaments to say "fuck it, not worth the effort".
I think the "WoW" part caused all the tournaments to say "fuck it, not worth the effort".
|
On June 17 2010 12:22 Kraz.Del wrote:
LAN on steam doesn't need to be cracked; LAN is a SC thing and most users who have steam have stable internet connections.
More importantly, not a whole lot of Steam games are played at LAN's and there aren't any games worth mentioning on Steam that are truly competitive.
|
On June 17 2010 12:24 Half wrote:Show nested quote +
It's how WoW tournaments have been handled for a long time, which I think has caused all but the biggest tournaments to say "fuck it, not worth the effort".
I think the "WoW" part caused all the biggest tournaments to say "fuck it, not worth the effort".
Most likely. Even amongst WoW players, there is very little demand for a real competitive arena, and the game is just terrible to watch as a spectator sport. Most people who follow the WoW e-Sports scene only care about which classes win so they can use it as an excuse to lobby for nerfs/buffs. MMOs just aren't meant for watching.
|
So there you are, 200 people at your college/school/university, all of you have legit copies of SC2 as it is available in the stores and desperately wanting to play.
Lagfest beyond belief.
How do you get Blizzard to show up?
|
On June 17 2010 13:54 a_flayer wrote:
So there you are, 200 people at your college/school/university, all of you have legit copies of SC2 as it is available in the stores and desperately wanting to play.
Lagfest beyond belief.
How do you get Blizzard to show up?
If a college's network can't handle 200 people playing starcraft there are bigger issues there
|
No LAN is not to prevent piracy. That's nonsense. Blizzard knows the game will be cracked.
No LAN is so that they can charge subscriptions in certain countries. If people could buy the game once and play on a LAN, they wouldn't need to pay a monthly fee.
The Professional Edition is because Blizzard knows that bnet2 is too laggy and unreliable for professional games but they want the money tournaments bring, so they're enabling it just for those tournaments.
They should fix the bnet2 lag and add LAN support, but then they couldn't try out a subscription model in Russia.
|
There will be LAN support for the big tournaments, which will result in getting a sc1 progaming look alike scene. Which is amazing!
The bad thing is that the people in Africa were maybe 10 people afford to buy a copy of the game cant host tournamants, i mean, who cares?!
|
On June 18 2010 08:26 Thorgrim wrote:
There will be LAN support for the big tournaments, which will result in getting a sc1 progaming look alike scene. Which is amazing!
The bad thing is that the people in Africa were maybe 10 people afford to buy a copy of the game cant host tournamants, i mean, who cares?!
That seems a rather narrow-minded perspective to believe only 10 people in Africa can afford to buy this game. Why don't you care? You obviously like this game, why don't you care that other gamers are deprived of the experience?
To others - I understand the hate for piracy and I share it, but when you're at a LAN and everybody jumps on that pirated copy of SC2, what are you going to do? Play Fallout 3? Call Blizzard HQ? Leave?
|
Sweeeeeeeeet news! Hopefully they are true. Crossin every finger and toe I have right now.
|
Really hope this is true! OSL FTW!!! Especially the whole qualification from around the world thing, it'd be nice to watch some foreigners try and compete. Even if just for the lawls. XD
|
On June 17 2010 13:56 Sputty wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 13:54 a_flayer wrote:
So there you are, 200 people at your college/school/university, all of you have legit copies of SC2 as it is available in the stores and desperately wanting to play.
Lagfest beyond belief.
How do you get Blizzard to show up? If a college's network can't handle 200 people playing starcraft there are bigger issues there
it greatly depends on how good the computer services department of the school is. their internet/network can most likely handle 200 geeks playing sc2, it's the other 200 dummies doing p2p that kills bandwidth.
and that can make your sc2 lag pretty bad
|
The disgust is beyond limits. Couldn't imagine they would whore themselves for money this much (not to mention that I'd like to know the name of that economy analyst who told them LAN-absence is gonna bring them billions of billions, so that it's worthwhile to disappoint their fanbase and go ahead and exclude it)
|
I don't see how no lan could prevent piracy when all the pirates will just download the lan edition anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
