|
On June 23 2011 09:18 Seam wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 09:12 Vandal_heart wrote:On June 23 2011 09:10 Seam wrote:On June 23 2011 09:06 Vandal_heart wrote:
Citation very much needed...
Really tired of some of the stuff thats done to screw over gamers in the fight against piracy. DRM that slows down pirated releases for a whole evening of some script kiddies time, and is removed for the non paying customer. One time use codes so you have to keep track of account details if you think youll want to replay a game at some point. And no lan, so you can watch MLG and see Incontrol's face get increasingly more FFFFFUUUUU as the connection to bnet lags. Again, I WANT LAN. I know it sucks we have to deal with it, but again, it makes sense they would do it. I'm getting tired of being screwed over to deal with pirates too, but until there aren't any(LOL) we have to deal with it. Again, "This is why we can't have nice things". It was citation needed for the "LAN would make the game be pirated a ton" section. ICCup, for one. Or the fact that 3.2 million were pirated already, and that's only for single player? Offering Free mutiplayer to pirates too? Starcraft 1 was pirated Millions of times, what makes you think Starcraft 2 wont in a time where pirating is much more common?
if it weren't for SC:BW pirates at Korean PC Bangs, there might not even be an SC2. piracy made the game popular. a pirated game doesn't mean a loss of a sale. it just means that someone who would likely never buy your game got to play your game and is now a fan of your work.
SC2:WoL pirates just makes a bigger market for SC2:HotS, and whatever DLC and paid services they wish to introduce until then.
LAN has nothing to do with loss of profits.
|
The people advocating tournament only LAN, note that this never works. Just like movies where people can get the original before the dvd comes out, the LAN game will leak and it will be all over the net. I know we all want LAN, but it will never happen, and I can't blame the game publisher for that.
|
On June 23 2011 09:11 eggs wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 08:50 SKC wrote:On June 23 2011 08:46 eggs wrote:
LoL is free and makes money just fine. i don't think piracy is the real factor to not implement a LAN feature.
Torchlight developers know how much their game was pirated and acknowledged that it only helps make their game more popular and allows for a bigger market for Torchlight 2 and their upcoming Torchlight MMO.
Magicka was pirated a lot, then they made a bunch of money from DLC packs and most recently a PvP mode.
if SC2 had LAN, that would be 1 less major complaint about the game that gets brought up at a majority of tournaments. even if exposure at MLG and GSL caused the game to get pirated a ton without many legit customers, it has 2 expansions coming up and incoming DLC.
the OP just makes it seem like the HoN developers don't understand the PC market anymore. Blizzard was really slow to adopt microtransactions with WoW, and whenever they did it made millions. SC2 was also released with a dated model, where they seemed to only care about initial launch sales. they heavily advertised on TV and various Korean markets (McDonald's) and after launch they stopped advertising and had no DLC.
the market is completely different now. SC2 could survive very easily with a low-graphics only, no achievements LAN mode. they could make a ton of money selling skins like the CE Thor that are toggled for bnet games only. LoL makes money by microtransactions. Would you be fine if SC2 was free, but you had to pay to be able to play on most maps or even races? Even if you can unlock things with playtime, only the most harcore can get most unlockables. This system just doesn't work for SC2. Microtransactions with WoW are diferent, they don't even affect the game, they are the same way as HoN does it, not LoL, and LoL wouldn't get the same amount of money by selling skins. WoW is so freaking big it, and this opportunities are not that common, so it works when they do it. WoW microtransactions absolutely affect the game. race changes, faction changes, server transfers, mobile AH. i'm saying HoN and SC2 could easily implement a low feature LAN mode and make a ton of money off the game and DLC. how many people here actually play SC2 with their roommates or close neighbors? 98% of my bnet friends list doesn't live within 1 hour of me. LAN would only help tournaments run more smoothly and make the game more popular at PC Bangs, which is never a bad thing. pirates are just a scapegoat. just like how "hackers" are a popular scapegoat for recent online security failures.
It's not sound business strategy to implement something that will lose you money only to offset it with something that will make profits. The same argument came up in discussing how it's not reasonable for Blizzard to let the profits from WoW offset potential losses from other games.
On June 23 2011 09:13 SKC wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 09:06 branflakes14 wrote:On June 23 2011 09:03 LITTLEHEAD wrote:
LAN is clearly wanted dearly, but the fact of the matter is that you CANNOT implement LAN without knowing you're going to lose HUGE amount of money. I do think a potential LAN that require you to log in online yet run a peer-to-peer connection/LAN of some form.
Anyone thinking that Blizzard or any other of these gaming companies don't NEED the money, then please open your own business and attempt to thrive under these savage conditions that are progressing. I do believe that some progress of LAN will be made such that they can implement it without risking piracy, but atm there should be no expectations of it in the immediate future.
Stating that someone like Microsoft has the biggest piracy issues and are still a forward moving company, comes from someone who is ignorant. Their scenario is completely differant in multiple ways. First of it has nothing to do with LAN, and their market is MUCH MUCH MUCH larger than that of a gaming company(specifically PCs).
I as much as anyone, want LAN and pray for it, but until a effective method of LAN that can be backed by the security of online gaming is created, there will only be large declines of LAN use. http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070312/165448.shtmlBill Gates openly admitted that Microsoft benefits from piracy. That's a very weird to apply that article. I don't think most people actually think piracy has no benefits at all, ever. I don't think Microsoft thinks piracy is better than no piracy. It doesn't fully apply to games, because Windows competes with a free software, so it's not a question of buying from whom, like a game, but a question of not paying for something diferent, piracy, or paying. If Linux would cost the same as windowns, and would be as hard to pirate, those schools in Russia wouldn't ever consider the switch.
Microsoft benefits from piracy because of "networks effects." The more users using Microsoft, the more powerful it becomes. You're right, this doesn't really apply to games because there's no kind of gaming monopoly since it's (relatively) easy to make new games that'll oust older ones.
|
On June 23 2011 09:26 Powerhunger wrote:
Publishers have no incentive to allow LAN in games until the amount of revenue they gain decreases from lack of LAN support. It probably never will for SC2, or HoN, or LoL. Developers are funded by publishers or are their own publishers. Piracy is not a sole cause but it is a contributing factor, and any ways piracy becomes more convenient are discouraged by publishers. It's pretty simple.
And any statistician will say that it's a terrible argument, because there is no control >.>
|
On June 23 2011 09:05 theOnslaught wrote:
We're so masochists as a race(humans), its unbelievable... why are we taking the sides of the few, and not the masses?, i appreciate the creativity and effort of the guys at blizzard, but the reality is that they're not even the ones making the money. The investors are, and they're making shitloads of return just based on a group of devoted, genius creatives that most companies have.
Watch tv shows like dragons den one day, the investors don't care one bit if you're going to feed all the world's hungry people with your invention, they care about return. How much money am i going to get if i invest... Its a stupid logic, that's only making a group of few people rich, while everyone else roots in poverty.
You have no idea how things work. The guys at Blizzard have jobs because the investors pay for them to create games. If the guys at Blizzard do a good job, they will be more in demand and all things equal their pay increases.
There would be no games if the investors didnt stump up the cash in the first place. They are the ones taking the risk, so therefore it is only fair that they should share in the rewards.
Seriously, some people are so ignorant.
|
On June 23 2011 09:23 Sevenofnines wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 09:05 Khao wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On June 23 2011 09:02 visual77 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 08:59 Khao wrote:On June 23 2011 08:50 Pirat6662001 wrote:On June 23 2011 08:48 Khao wrote:On June 23 2011 08:44 Pirat6662001 wrote:
Games that people pirate= games they wouldnt buy otherwise. And companies like Valve and Blizzard shouldnt worry about it cause they make awesome games that people WANT to buy. Top Pirated PC games on Bit Torrent for 2010 1) Call of Duty: Black Ops (4,270,000) 2) Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (3,960,000) 3) Mafia 2 (3,240,000) 4) Mass Effect 2 (3,240,000) 5) Starcraft II (3,120,000)Pretty much everyone on TL fall under the category of people WANTING to buy SC2. But there is also a large group of people unwilling to buy, these numbers are probably quite a bit larger given the date of the source. Source: http://www.destructoid.com/here-are-bit-torrent-s-top-pirated-games-of-2010-190459.phtml Silly, I downloaded a game through a bittorrent because it was faster than through blizzard system (i dont own a hard copy), but i still have a legit copy. Just cause you download a torrent doesnt make you a pirate. I download most games i buy (dont own hard copys) through a torrent and have a legal version still. I now that my gamer friends do the same thing cause its efficient I would argue that is still stealing, you bought a legit copy but that still does mean your stealing. Unless the distributor or producer of a game permitted you to acquire the game in such a manner you would be stealing. You really believe that? Do you also believe that it's stealing to buy an album, then rip it to my MP3 player? I can't understand this mentality - that every single thing a business desires is how things should be. The shift to digital music mostly happened because consumers got fed up with unreasonable demands, like the example I gave, and decided en masse to say "Fuck you. I'm doing it anyway.". Yes I do. You acquired an ILLEGAL copy of the digital and intellectual contents that Blizzard created, through a method of free exchange that was UNAUTHORIZED and NOT permitted by Blizzard. If that's not stealing, I really need to revise my understanding of it. The situation he is describing would not be illegal in the United States. Maybe its different where you are from. In the US, consumers are allowed to make backups of anything they purchase. They can make as many backups as they want, as long as it is restricted to private use and they do not distribute them (especially for profit). This is why things like CD/DVD/BR Burners are not banned even though they are widely used for making illegal copies of games. Because although there are probably a ton of illegal copies made and distributed in this manner, there are legal uses as well (backups, homemade videos, custom music, etc.). Basically, as long as he owns a legit copy, he can have as many "illegal" copies as he wants. As long as he doesn't try to distribute them to other people or try and sell the copies for profit it's perfectly legal. The grey area is with things like BitTorrent since as you download you are uploading to other people who may or may not have legit copies. However this is enough of a grey area that BitTorrent has not yet been locked down despite being by far the most common way to pirate.
He was replying to the guy that downloaded SC2, not the transfer of music. That or Blizzard started making music.
If that example applied to music, yes it would be illegal, you can't download a music just because you own the CD, what you can do it rip it from the CD to anywhere you want, it's basically the reason emulators and roms aren't technically illegal.
There is a very clear line between ripping a copy of something you own, and downloading another copy of something you already own.
Of course, that notion is already kinda silly, and applying that to a game is even sillier, if he has the game, and he downloads it because it's faster, who cares. I doubt that many people actually do that though, so the vality of the example is debatable. Still, piracy numbers are never correct.
|
On June 23 2011 09:24 flowSthead wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 09:22 theOnslaught wrote:On June 23 2011 09:21 masterbreti wrote:
Just for reference. Right now over 5k people are downloading sc2 and pirating it. at 50 a peice. There is something like 300,000 in lost sales just for today. assuming on average sc2 get pirated the same amount for the last 6 months and for the entire 2011.
That means in 2011 alone. sc2 was pirated and lost blizz more than 3.6 million. Thats a huge amount fo money.
I think in 2010 the most pirated gameswas sc2 with like 1.2 million pirated it. Thats hundreds of millions of dollars lost. You're a fool, not everyone that pirated the game was going to buy it in the first place. People keep up bringing this up, but I do not see how it makes it better. It is the equivalent argument to saying that not everyone that drinks and drives will murder someone. It happens often enough.
Excuse me sir, which arguing college did you go to? Because they have done some sterling work...
|
On June 23 2011 09:26 dudeman001 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 09:11 eggs wrote:On June 23 2011 08:50 SKC wrote:On June 23 2011 08:46 eggs wrote:
LoL is free and makes money just fine. i don't think piracy is the real factor to not implement a LAN feature.
Torchlight developers know how much their game was pirated and acknowledged that it only helps make their game more popular and allows for a bigger market for Torchlight 2 and their upcoming Torchlight MMO.
Magicka was pirated a lot, then they made a bunch of money from DLC packs and most recently a PvP mode.
if SC2 had LAN, that would be 1 less major complaint about the game that gets brought up at a majority of tournaments. even if exposure at MLG and GSL caused the game to get pirated a ton without many legit customers, it has 2 expansions coming up and incoming DLC.
the OP just makes it seem like the HoN developers don't understand the PC market anymore. Blizzard was really slow to adopt microtransactions with WoW, and whenever they did it made millions. SC2 was also released with a dated model, where they seemed to only care about initial launch sales. they heavily advertised on TV and various Korean markets (McDonald's) and after launch they stopped advertising and had no DLC.
the market is completely different now. SC2 could survive very easily with a low-graphics only, no achievements LAN mode. they could make a ton of money selling skins like the CE Thor that are toggled for bnet games only. LoL makes money by microtransactions. Would you be fine if SC2 was free, but you had to pay to be able to play on most maps or even races? Even if you can unlock things with playtime, only the most harcore can get most unlockables. This system just doesn't work for SC2. Microtransactions with WoW are diferent, they don't even affect the game, they are the same way as HoN does it, not LoL, and LoL wouldn't get the same amount of money by selling skins. WoW is so freaking big it, and this opportunities are not that common, so it works when they do it. WoW microtransactions absolutely affect the game. race changes, faction changes, server transfers, mobile AH. i'm saying HoN and SC2 could easily implement a low feature LAN mode and make a ton of money off the game and DLC. how many people here actually play SC2 with their roommates or close neighbors? 98% of my bnet friends list doesn't live within 1 hour of me. LAN would only help tournaments run more smoothly and make the game more popular at PC Bangs, which is never a bad thing. pirates are just a scapegoat. just like how "hackers" are a popular scapegoat for recent online security failures. It's not sound business strategy to implement something that will lose you money only to offset it with something that will make profits. The same argument came up in discussing how it's not reasonable for Blizzard to let the profits from WoW offset potential losses from other games.
slapping LAN on the game would sell more copies of it. pirated copies don't mean a loss of sales. LAN wouldn't lose them money. it would only increase future profits.
|
On June 23 2011 09:17 Zeke50100 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 09:16 thesundowners wrote:On June 23 2011 09:12 Ridiculisk wrote:
I'm confused as to why adding a LAN feature will cause a decrease in sales and an increase in Piracy???
Is it just becasue people will pirate the game to play with their friends at home? Off the ladder?
I would have thought that adding additional features to one of your best selling games, especially features that the players WANT, would increase sales, not decrease them??? Because there's really no way to make sure that somebody playing on a LAN actually bought your game. And the fact that Starcraft 2 is already ridiculously pirated should probably tell you that if you give a feature that esentially encourages piracy is probably going to inflate those numbers even more Again, how does it encourage piracy beyond the level that it already is?
You can torrent SC2 right now. But since the meat of SC2's gameplay is in multiplayer, and there's no way to play multiplayer without having a B.Net account, and there's no way to authorize your pirated copy of SC2, you cannot play SC2 multiplayer. And if you can't play SC2 in multiplayer, why the hell would you pirate it in the first place?
See, it's easy to crack a game. It's much harder to crack B.Net, since B.Net doesn't run on your machine. If LAN were available, all hackers would need to do is to convince your copy of SC2 to LAN with someone else's copy of SC2. That's trivial; just a bit of tracing through he assembly and short-circuiting the parts that talk to B.Net.
However, since LAN isn't available, short-circuiting the parts that talk to B.Net won't help. It would just make the game singleplayer-only. And therefore, if Blizzard made LAN available, it would immediately make a pirated copy of SC2 much more valuable. Therefore, more people would pirate it instead of playing it themselves.
Because once you have LAN, it's very easy to set up non-LAN play. All you need is for a machine to look like it is an SC2 client, but instead farm its packets out to the internet. Once you can do that, you can set up your own ICCUP-style ladder if you want. And then you have 100% of the SC2 experience while paying $0 to Blizzard.
|
I find it funny that people make the argument that everyone who pirates Starcraft 2 wouldn't have bought it anyway. This is completely true. But on the flip side, of everyone who has bought Starcraft 2, who would've pirated instead if you could play the multiplayer on the pirated version? Maybe a small part would've bought the game of all those who pirated it, and maybe a small part would've pirated the multiplayer if possible. But that's still a lot of lost money for Blizzard. Not to mention controlling tournaments and such to avoid the Kespa thing.
|
On June 23 2011 09:06 branflakes14 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 09:03 LITTLEHEAD wrote:
LAN is clearly wanted dearly, but the fact of the matter is that you CANNOT implement LAN without knowing you're going to lose HUGE amount of money. I do think a potential LAN that require you to log in online yet run a peer-to-peer connection/LAN of some form.
Anyone thinking that Blizzard or any other of these gaming companies don't NEED the money, then please open your own business and attempt to thrive under these savage conditions that are progressing. I do believe that some progress of LAN will be made such that they can implement it without risking piracy, but atm there should be no expectations of it in the immediate future.
Stating that someone like Microsoft has the biggest piracy issues and are still a forward moving company, comes from someone who is ignorant. Their scenario is completely differant in multiple ways. First of it has nothing to do with LAN, and their market is MUCH MUCH MUCH larger than that of a gaming company(specifically PCs).
I as much as anyone, want LAN and pray for it, but until a effective method of LAN that can be backed by the security of online gaming is created, there will only be large declines of LAN use. http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070312/165448.shtmlBill Gates openly admitted that Microsoft benefits from piracy.
Microsoft does benefit by the fact that if people pirate their software at home they become familiar with it. Businesses on the other hand generally cannot pirate software, and as everyone is familiar with Microsoft products, the familiarity (which the piracy contributes to) helps keep their stranglehold on the market.
Ofcourse if there was no piracy, they would probably make more money despite a lower penetration rate.
You can't compare the effects on a game like SC2 as its not used by businesses.
|
On June 23 2011 09:28 Vandal_heart wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 09:24 flowSthead wrote:On June 23 2011 09:22 theOnslaught wrote:On June 23 2011 09:21 masterbreti wrote:
Just for reference. Right now over 5k people are downloading sc2 and pirating it. at 50 a peice. There is something like 300,000 in lost sales just for today. assuming on average sc2 get pirated the same amount for the last 6 months and for the entire 2011.
That means in 2011 alone. sc2 was pirated and lost blizz more than 3.6 million. Thats a huge amount fo money.
I think in 2010 the most pirated gameswas sc2 with like 1.2 million pirated it. Thats hundreds of millions of dollars lost. You're a fool, not everyone that pirated the game was going to buy it in the first place. People keep up bringing this up, but I do not see how it makes it better. It is the equivalent argument to saying that not everyone that drinks and drives will murder someone. It happens often enough. Excuse me sir, which arguing college did you go to? Because they have done some sterling work...
How is the analogy poor? Illegally downloading a game and drunk driving are both illegal, and both of them have the possibility to cause harm. One by potential lost sales, and the other by injury or death. People not against piracy are saying that not all pirates would have purchased anyway, and I make the analogy that not all drunk driving results in death. This doesn't change that more drunk driving usually leads to more death, and more pirating will mean a greater number of people that might have bought it. Also, both are illegal.
Explain to me where the analogy fails.
|
Again, are gaming corporations apart of the same business? No, gaming is typically in a small percentage of those who even own a computer. Typically Males in and around their 20s.
This is not the same thing as someone who doesn't want to spend $400 for photoshop or something of the similar nature. I myself may or may not have  pirated something of like the likes of photoshop for which I NEVER would have actually purchased because it was only to play around with...similar to that of a video game.
People will pirate games to try and them and yes they may purchase them afterwards, but the fact is that with a falling economy in the states, and gaming companies (especially newer ones) are trying to establish themselves for the future so that they can continue to make games. The amount that will try the game and then purchase it after compared to the LOSS in market would likely be more severe for that of a gaming corporation.
Of course i dont have facts to back that up, and i can't show statistics on this happening, but it would logically make sense that the same does not apply to video games as it does to operating systems, or business applications and software.
When the gaming industry (in the states) maintains a foothold of that of the PC industry, or something near to it, i would expect things to fall more into line of someone like Microsoft. This is why i stated the Microsoft is not the same as a gaming company in my original post.
|
On June 23 2011 09:26 Zeke50100 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 09:26 Powerhunger wrote:
Publishers have no incentive to allow LAN in games until the amount of revenue they gain decreases from lack of LAN support. It probably never will for SC2, or HoN, or LoL. Developers are funded by publishers or are their own publishers. Piracy is not a sole cause but it is a contributing factor, and any ways piracy becomes more convenient are discouraged by publishers. It's pretty simple. And any statistician will say that it's a terrible argument, because there is no control >.>
I don't consider any of the arguments here to be statistically motivated. People want LAN. There isn't enough pressure on the publishers to get LAN, you don't get LAN. Game publishers want developers to make products people will buy. People are currently buying products without LAN, and publishers perceive LAN as a liability up until the point that it makes them more money. Has nothing to do with stats, it's a pretty simple established pattern.
|
On June 23 2011 07:10 mdma-_- wrote:
that still doesnt explain why they cant allow people to play each other in lan with the necessecity of being logged into bnet/whatever online client.
cheap excuse just to blame it on pirates tbh
Think logically. It makes perfect sense from a business standpoint. Pretty much anyone can find a way to pirate a game that has LAN just by googling it.
|
On June 23 2011 09:28 eggs wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 09:26 dudeman001 wrote:On June 23 2011 09:11 eggs wrote:On June 23 2011 08:50 SKC wrote:On June 23 2011 08:46 eggs wrote:
LoL is free and makes money just fine. i don't think piracy is the real factor to not implement a LAN feature.
Torchlight developers know how much their game was pirated and acknowledged that it only helps make their game more popular and allows for a bigger market for Torchlight 2 and their upcoming Torchlight MMO.
Magicka was pirated a lot, then they made a bunch of money from DLC packs and most recently a PvP mode.
if SC2 had LAN, that would be 1 less major complaint about the game that gets brought up at a majority of tournaments. even if exposure at MLG and GSL caused the game to get pirated a ton without many legit customers, it has 2 expansions coming up and incoming DLC.
the OP just makes it seem like the HoN developers don't understand the PC market anymore. Blizzard was really slow to adopt microtransactions with WoW, and whenever they did it made millions. SC2 was also released with a dated model, where they seemed to only care about initial launch sales. they heavily advertised on TV and various Korean markets (McDonald's) and after launch they stopped advertising and had no DLC.
the market is completely different now. SC2 could survive very easily with a low-graphics only, no achievements LAN mode. they could make a ton of money selling skins like the CE Thor that are toggled for bnet games only. LoL makes money by microtransactions. Would you be fine if SC2 was free, but you had to pay to be able to play on most maps or even races? Even if you can unlock things with playtime, only the most harcore can get most unlockables. This system just doesn't work for SC2. Microtransactions with WoW are diferent, they don't even affect the game, they are the same way as HoN does it, not LoL, and LoL wouldn't get the same amount of money by selling skins. WoW is so freaking big it, and this opportunities are not that common, so it works when they do it. WoW microtransactions absolutely affect the game. race changes, faction changes, server transfers, mobile AH. i'm saying HoN and SC2 could easily implement a low feature LAN mode and make a ton of money off the game and DLC. how many people here actually play SC2 with their roommates or close neighbors? 98% of my bnet friends list doesn't live within 1 hour of me. LAN would only help tournaments run more smoothly and make the game more popular at PC Bangs, which is never a bad thing. pirates are just a scapegoat. just like how "hackers" are a popular scapegoat for recent online security failures. It's not sound business strategy to implement something that will lose you money only to offset it with something that will make profits. The same argument came up in discussing how it's not reasonable for Blizzard to let the profits from WoW offset potential losses from other games. slapping LAN on the game would sell more copies of it. pirated copies don't mean a loss of sales. LAN wouldn't lose them money. it would only increase future profits.
Obviously they have done analysis of this and disagree. I tend to believe them, sad as the case may be for those of us that would like Lan.
|
I can understand why Blizzard don't introduce LAN, My friend pirated a copy of SC2 then played the single player liked it and bought a full copy. It would be very naive to think he would do the same if he could play online for "free".
|
They need to add baneling capes to SC2 so that their primary source of revenue is no longer from game sales, but from selling shit to djWHEAT. Then they can stop giving two hoots about piracy and implement LAN mode.
|
On June 23 2011 09:36 Phaded wrote:
They need to add baneling capes to SC2 so that their primary source of revenue is no longer from game sales, but from selling shit to djWHEAT. Then they can stop giving two hoots about piracy and implement LAN mode.
LoL'd sooooo hard.
|
blizzard should just give the tournement organizers like mlg, dreamhack a mobile server that only the players on the tournements can access to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
