|
On June 23 2011 07:33 Seronei wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 07:31 Numy wrote:On June 23 2011 07:29 emythrel wrote:On June 23 2011 07:24 Osmoses wrote:On June 23 2011 07:18 darkscream wrote:
Bad argument made by propagandist.
Pirates wouldn't have bought the game anyway, and including LAN would let your game get exposed to new people for free. This is like saying "terrorists ruined travel", even though it's the government ruining travelling.
Not to mention that most of these games have online ladder systems and that's what people buy the game for - The competitive ladder.
What can you really say. As a game developer he has to talk like that because its his bread and butter. But, because of this I feel like his opinion is pretty much not relevant because it's strongly biased without any actual proof/evidence to his claims. Just saber rattling towards pirates. Had I not been able to download the vast majority of the games on my computer, I would have bought them instead. I never play SC2 on ladder, I only play against friends. What is your post if not biased, without any actual proof/evidence? This is me exactly, if i can play a game without paying for it..... then i don't pay for it. If a game requires a legit copy to play multiplayer, I generally try to find a way to play for free first and see if its worth buying.... with SC2 I wanted to play it and knew I had no option but to buy it if i wanted to play online and since i'm a blizz junkie i just went out and bought it, infact i bought it twice lol While many pirates would never pay for the game, there are many who will when forced to. There is a steam patch that allows you to play DN forever with a pirate copy, guess what..... i know a ton of people who were gonna buy it that just downloaded it instead once they found out they could play multiplayer for free...... You make me a bit sad. Why wouldn't you buy a game you spend time playing even if you can pirate it? Because you have a limited amount of money, if you don't buy that game you can afford going to that concert with your favorite band and when you can get the game for free it doesn't make any sense to prioritize the companies well being above your enjoyment.
Then the company tanks or goes to other measures to make sure you pay(No lan). Then people precede to complain to said company because of this. Really I see no justification.
|
On June 23 2011 07:19 Eury wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 07:17 DeltruS wrote: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 Hackers could fairly easily remove all safeguards like a log-in requirement. Fairly easy = couple of hours.
I am no computer genius but it seems to me that what's needed for tournaments is network play. Games could still be setup through battle.net. The problems occur during the actual game when the information is sent through the battle.net servers rather than peer to peer. Will hackers still be able to "remove all safeguards" when the game is programmed so that you have to be on bnet 2.0 to connect to each other?
It's also an amazingly retarded argument for RTS games anyways because the types of players that would only play lan and not play internet multiplayer are the EXACT SAME PEOPLE who would pirate the game just to play single player.
|
Well, the goodnews is I'll never have to wonder if maybe I should try out HoN. I know I won't now with the kind of attitude they have.
You treat customers like criminals and surprise surprise they will either not buy it or be the criminal you see them to be. I don't pirate games, most people don't pirate games and those who pirate them are unlikely to actually buy them(moral exceptions of course) So you don't actually loose out on them.
When you start putting in DRM, removing key features, putting in DLC content that should be apart of the game in the first place that's when you start seeing people who would of bought it, just pirate it.
Count me as someone who will never play HoN because of this childish stubborn argument. I can't tolerate nor will I support people who remove features and blame it on the pirates and not themselves. I am completely offended and disgusted.
|
On June 23 2011 07:14 ThePurist wrote:
Microsoft operating systems and office software are two of the biggest pirated softwares and they still make money. This guy tries to act like a realist but he doesn't really have a clue about economics.
But Microsoft would make more money if that stuff wasn't pirated. Just like Blizzard makes way more money because SC2 isn't pirated.
|
I thought that it was pretty obvious this was the reason... Seeing as Activision did the same thing with CoD by removing dedicated servers. Why add a feature that will just decrease sales? Doesn't really make any sense from Blizzard's perspective. GSL and Dreamhack do not really have any problem with lag / disconnects. MLG seems to be the only event where I see disconnect screens all the time and I guess it's up to them to get a better internet connection at their venues.
|
Goodwill is nice to have but it doesn't pay the bills and any gaming company out there is out there to make money first and make good games second
Even if you believe it or not, the person who said this paragraph in a public interview should be banned from public speaking, fired and completely dissociated with the company. I understand and even (kinda) agree with his point, but wow.
Anyway. From S2's pov, a small company trying to make it out there, I understand it. From Blizzard's, who at this point would lose almost nothing compared to what they made, there's no excuse for not bringing out LAN. -At LEAST- as a special client, privileged for major competitions (GSL, DH, MLG, etc).
|
On June 23 2011 07:31 MK4512 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 07:20 akaname wrote:
i'm genuinely intrigued about the people saying this article is nonsense...
Why are Blizzard not including LAN? Like, seriously, it's annoyed a lot of fans and wouldn't be that difficult technically? For what reason are they deciding not to?
It's pretty simple, with LAN, you can have things like ICCUP/brainclan, etc. where you dont need to pay for SC to play, and you can play online, with real rankings, etc. Blizzard doesn't make any money off of this, and people that might buy the game would just pirate it instead.
wait, what does lan have to do with iccup? iccup is essentially a battle.net emulator, right...? it's not using lan...
|
He should at least read what he links:
I pirated the witcher 2 because they didn't release a demo for me to make sure it ran and make sure I liked the gameplay. Then I bought it. Pc games can't be returned or traded in. Demos should be mandatory
...
I've pirated games before for this exact reason. I'm not going to pay money for something that I'm not sure will run and that I'm even less sure I'll enjoy.
yeah i bought brink and there's no way i can get a refund. so fuck that shit. Next time if i don't know if the game is any good i am waiting for a steam sale.
...
I bought Hellgate: London. I feel your pain.
I paid for the lifetime subscription. I feel more pain...
I bought the collector's Edition and the lifetime subscription, I feel a tad bit more pain.
(lol)
Also in case of LAN, if they provide a good online platform (like sc2) why dont release lan also? you dont get nearly as much and as good, as your skill-level games in a lan-cracked tool.
even wc3 has more games (normal games, not dota) in bnet as in all 5-6 lan-tools and people played it there. dota has no support on bnet, so why not use tools there.
I don't wanna defend piratery, but it's not that simple as this developer wants to make it. The problem they have is that its easier to release no LAN then to build the best online-platform for their game themselves.
Btw: I actually bought SC:BW 5 months ago and did play it 2 hours full and don't regret to buy it, even though i only can play on Iccup (what's the most funny thing there? It's not a LAN-crack, it's an Internet-Port crack)
|
On June 23 2011 07:36 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 07:19 Eury wrote:On June 23 2011 07:17 DeltruS wrote: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 Hackers could fairly easily remove all safeguards like a log-in requirement. Fairly easy = couple of hours. I am no computer genius but it seems to me that what's needed for tournaments is network play. Games could still be setup through battle.net. The problems occur during the actual game when the information is sent through the battle.net servers rather than peer to peer. Will hackers still be able to "remove all safeguards" when the game is programmed so that you have to be on bnet 2.0 to connect to each other?
I am also no computer genius, but I do believe that this way would be crackeable. Maybe not in a couple of hours, but probally wouldn't take too long.
|
On June 23 2011 07:37 Datum wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 07:14 ThePurist wrote:
Microsoft operating systems and office software are two of the biggest pirated softwares and they still make money. This guy tries to act like a realist but he doesn't really have a clue about economics.
But Microsoft would make more money if that stuff wasn't pirated. Just like Blizzard makes way more money because SC2 isn't pirated.
What about sales that are made *because* of sharing. When arguing about sharing, you have to look at both sides. If I share SC2 with a friend and he really enjoys it and then buys SC2 / HOTS when that comes out, would that sale have been made if I only told him it's awesome and worth the money? Maybe. Maybe not.
|
This is what have been explained in every "Why no LAN?"-thread.
1) If Blizzard adds LAN support then it is relatively easy for any good programmer to remove eventuall security checks. The game would be pirated in no time.
2) How many here would honestly buy SC2 along with both expansions if it easily could be pirated? At least I wouldn't.
All gaming companies need to fight piracy in order to stay alive. Suing people is a bad choice since it will make your company look bad. Preventing people from accessing the game without going through your servers is the best solution.
|
The thing I'm wondering about is how long will it be before someone just sets up an alternate battle.net server in China. People set up fake WoW servers and such so it's not like it's impossible to set up pirate servers without LAN support already in the game--LAN just makes it much easier. After this happens will Blizzard then release LAN support to the rest of the community?
|
I understand the reasons Blizzard can't have LAN. I love Blizzard, they give me years of entertainment with each game.
I know they've been haunted by the whole LAN issue for a long time. I know they wish they could find a reasonable way to give it to us. They simply can't come out and say: "We're doing it for sales," so they remain relatively quiet.
In fact, bookmark this post. I can almost guarantee that after Legacy of the Void has been on shelves for a while, we will get a big announcement, possibly at Blizzcon, that LAN is finally coming to SC2. When all that's left is the pro scene and sales have begun to dwindle, they will give us LAN.
Until then, I understand. I don't blame the pirates, Blizzard, or anyone else. It's just the way things are.
|
Why not just implement LAN after the game has sold a few million copies... youve gotten your money now so lets move on.
|
it definitely makes sense for them, i would want as much money as I can get!
Now, for sc2, all that needs to happen is for Activision to get better netcoding and servers, so that we don't have 0.4 second delay and lag all the time. And so that we can play cross region.
Which unfortunately will be unlikely for a long long time, since Activision doesn't view SC2 as a priority since it's a buy once play free forever game >.>
|
On June 23 2011 07:40 Batch wrote:
This is what have been explained in every "Why no LAN?"-thread.
1) If Blizzard adds LAN support then it is relatively easy for any good programmer to remove eventuall security checks. The game would be pirated in no time.
2) How many here would honestly buy SC2 along with both expansions if it easily could be pirated? At least I wouldn't.
All gaming companies need to fight piracy in order to stay alive. Suing people is a bad choice since it will make your company look bad. Preventing people from accessing the game without going through your servers is the best solution.
I still would. Partially because of loyalty to Blizzard, but mostly for the same reason I buy music digitally, rather than downloading illegal - there is a little extra comfort and security I feel is worth the cost. When it comes to music, that comfort (for me) is properly named files, complete albums, and all those other goodies that are only 50/50 on sharing sites. With games, it's knowing I have proper installation media, I won't have to fret about possibly running a crack that may or may not work, dealing with registry editing, etc. I feel that comfort is worth the money. I could download, crack and install just fine. I just don't think it's worth the hassle relative to the $60 I'd pay at retail.
|
omg whats wrong here, all that is needed, is to make people sign into their servers for say 5 mins to verify your account, than unlock the LAN feature, just make it so that i have to play a game 1st or something. and what about dream hack and GSL. Making the players play with latency because companies are to lazy to find a way to solve this issue. Pirates aren't to blame, maybe if they would just spend some time going, "hey, you bought the game, hey your signed in, hey you just played an online game, you are now verified as owning the game, LAN is unlocked" ass holes.....
|
On June 23 2011 07:42 Kollapse wrote:
I understand the reasons Blizzard can't have LAN. I love Blizzard, they give me years of entertainment with each game.
woop hooray for some Blizzard love, finally.
We play their games constantly, but most of the comments on these forums make them look like the biggest douche factory ever!
|
still no reason not to have tournament servers. i guess its rather unrealistic a couple of pirates stealing the server....
|
On June 23 2011 07:39 n0ise wrote:
Anyway. From S2's pov, a small company trying to make it out there, I understand it. From Blizzard's, who at this point would lose almost nothing compared to what they made, there's no excuse for not bringing out LAN. -At LEAST- as a special client, privileged for major competitions (GSL, DH, MLG, etc).
Having LAN in your game in this day and age is basically encouraging piracy, no matter how big you are it does not look good to shareholders. I know we all want game developers to be benevolent beings who exist only to make us happy, but in the end making money is what it's about and making decisions that will only lose you money isn't exactly a good idea
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
