|
On June 23 2011 07:33 SKC wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 07:23 Fruscainte wrote:On June 23 2011 07:22 Numy wrote:On June 23 2011 07:18 AndAgain wrote:
He just said what any intelligent person already understands. Obviously companies have good reasons for not putting LAN. Yea it's a pity. The problem is most of the prevention for piracy hurts the guys that buy the games too. ALL forms of DRM and "prevention" (such as excluding LAN) hurt the paying customers more than pirates, this is not even a debate. Just because you say it's not debatable, doesn't mean it's the truth. Let's look at what you say, and apply it to SC2: Pirates: Can only play single player. Customers: Have to suffer through lag that is pretty damn annoying in local tournaments or lan parties. I would say that it harms someone that pirates SC2 more than a customer. It doesn't matter where you stand in this, but don't act like only your point is valid.
ummmm tbh it doesn't hurt the pirate more then the customer. i.e.: ITS FREE
If customers want lan, then they should get it.Blizzard if they are so scared their sales will skyrocket down,then they need to find a way to incorporate lan, with having ways where the game becomes hard, if not impossible to pirate onto mutiplayer .
|
On June 23 2011 07:25 Phaded wrote:
Lazy cop out. You can have LAN with drm. Look at counter strike.
It just took me less than a minute to find online enabled versions of both 1.6 and Source online...
|
I don't see why we don't just use morse code to transfer the damn data, it might be faster then bnet does...
Gah this is a predicament isn't it, on one side you have your loyal fans being hurt, but on the other you have yourself taking a blow (small or large doesnt matter)...
Perhaps the best choice is to introduce lan after the expansions are out, by that time the purchasing of the game by the mass will be minimal in comparison to the games sales right now.
|
On June 23 2011 07:47 Jarmam wrote:Give the man some credit. At least he's honest! The thing that pisses me off the most with Blizzard's "customer communication" is that they're - blatantly obviously - lying about their motives for why they insist on doing what they're doing as if it's somehow better than what they used to do. "The technology isnt there yet". "We hope Battle.net 2.0 will be so good that you won't even need LAN". Christ. They're insulting our intelligence on a level that's below a DotA-forumgoers average post. This man says something I could actually believe. I think he's wrong or at least inaccurate. But I can see where he's coming from. Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 07:37 Parnage wrote:
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. And people like this is exactly why Blizzard will keep insulting our intelligence - because there are those (and a lot of "those") that eat their BS up raw. Do you actually think Blizzard, or any DRM-happy company thats not including basic once-mandatory assets - like, say, LAN in SC2 - do it for your sake? And not for the sake of their sales? Really?
Excuse me? I am sorry how the hell can I support a company that doesn't have lan and blames it on pirates. Hey. I am going to limit your bandwidth because of pirates, hey I am going to take out major chunks of the games you buy because of pirates.
Where does it stop? Seriously. At what point is it too far? Blizzard needs to put in LAN, games that need lan should get lan and games that continue to use heavy handed DRM, remove important features are not going to be games I am going to buy or enjoy.
So excuse me for having an opinion on things.
|
Like many posters before me I wonder why they can't make LAN, though you'd have to log into bnet to access it?
|
On June 23 2011 08:07 Sina92 wrote:
Like many posters before me I wonder why they can't make LAN, though you'd have to log into bnet to access it?
Because it wouldn't work.
You have to log into Bnet to play the campaign.
It was cracked basically in launch day.
|
On June 23 2011 08:03 dudeman001 wrote:
I go to the store and steal a steak. It costs everyone who made that steak money to get that steak there. I argue that I would've never bought the steak in the first place, but since I could take it I did.
Honestly, how is piracy tolerated at all? Companies don't pay millions of dollars developing a game with the mindset "well, people are going to steal this anyway but atleast we can be proud of what we made." That's bullshit. Game developers, movie & tv producers, all of them deserve money for what they make. If piracy is supposed to be okay, then start paying for games with 5 minutes of unblockable advertising for every minute you play because that's how they're going to have to pay for it.
Its tolerated due to the difficulty of stopping it. Take the music industry for example, tons of producers lost millions from pirating songs. They were foolish to pursue individuals in an attempt to prove a point, a scare tactic. Their entire attempt was in vein as they lost even more money with pirating on a continued rise. The only company that took a different perspective was Apple, they made iTunes a focus on convenience and accessibility. The was the most effective way of combating music piracy as of yet.
Additionally there are privacy laws in several countries that allow ISPs to withhold personal information from authorities. Take Canada for example, pirate haven.
|
1.6 has lan and you have to be logged into steam to play !
this guy has seemed to only look has hon and sc2 as examples of games using/not using lan
|
These guys just dont get it... pirating is not killing any industries, most of the people who pirate wont even buy the game anyways, if pirating wasnt possible, you would see people lending their games, as they do with DVD's, or books, to friends after they finish reading them.
If anything, pirating is good for all industries, as people will not likely buy something that they havent tested, and liked... there is a bigger chance of someone pirating SC2, liking it and then, buying the game, than anything else, since lets get serious here, the real deal in RTS games is not the missions, not even lan (playing with your friends), the real deal is online play, and great online playing systems should alone be a reason to have to buy the game, rather than them forcing you through silly tactics that are only holding e-sports back (because of how common issues like disconnections and lag are in local tournaments).
There is a great video arround youtube about a book writer, that at first hated pirating, because he though of it as people stealing him money, but when he noticed the places where he was beign pirated had a GREAT increase in sales (like russia), he understood that pirating was a way for new people to get to know his work, and then, if they liked it, buy it.
|
It's been a year since release, would they really be losing out on that many sales? The real problem would be the expansions i suppose.
|
On June 23 2011 08:01 ThePurist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 07:56 worldsnap wrote:
You keep saying this over and over but it's still not true. While a pirated copy of something is definitely not always a lost sale (For example, i'm not going to actually rent all the movies i watch if i couldn't download them), but i sure as hell downloaded a lot of games until Steam made it even easier than pirating to get a game on release. And i'm by far not the only person in this position.
lol, I said it twice for the sake of reiteration because they selectively read my post and argued on pretty much no basis. Pirates were not consumers in the first place = "While a pirated copy of something is definitely not always a lost sale." Enough said. edit: quotations
You're wrong. Pirates make many real consumers feel like suckers. This leads some of them to start pirating as well.
|
I recall back in elementary school, and for a majority of high school, I had to rely on bootleg+piracy for games. They were too expensive (I like to get something healthy for lunch and healthy food tend to cost all the money you have) for me.
But because I had the opportunity to play so many games in my childhood, I am able to appreciate great games. So now that I actually can afford games, I buy their products to support the company.
I recall buying Dragon Age 2 just a while ago, and god damn I want my money back. I feel like I got scammed by all the hype, and fooled by DA:O's success. So you know what EA? When you decide to release the next game in that series, I am going to pirate it.
//**
Take a small step back, piracy has plagued any digital media: not just games. Music, movies, etc etc. Things other than games (that includes many software products) learned to adapt to the changing landscape and build a business model which "expects" piracy. Some provide better service to paying customers, some include tangible goods along with their digital media... Do we see software taking away offline functionality for "anti-piracy"? Not really. Do we see film makers making shittier movies because now they earn less through DVD sales? No, they include extra-footages and content.
A lot of single player games have been successful despite piracy. Not adding LAN sure, may net you some more purchase, but for me - I am satisfied enough with LoL to even bother with HoN: at least I know all my friends have access to LoL.
|
On June 23 2011 08:10 Khao wrote:
Additionally there are privacy laws in several countries that allow ISPs to withhold personal information from authorities. Take Canada for example, pirate haven.
Until you run out of the 50gb you can transfer each month. 
|
Pirates didn't kill LAN. The companies ultimately made the choice to kill LAN. They blame they were forced due to external pressures and coercion by pirates. I believe them when there are external forces that govern their internal decisions, but to what extent really? At the end of the day, LAN or no LAN they still see profits.
|
BTW, what is infact killing the induestries is pricing though, all games, specially xbox & ps3 games are overpriced, i remember when steam did a price reduction to left 4 dead as an experiment, they reduced the cost in half, to $25 usd. That day alone they sold more games than the 3 months the game had been out. Game pricing and greedyness is killing the game industries, not pirating, pirating is only helping them, like any demo would.
|
On June 23 2011 08:11 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 08:01 ThePurist wrote:On June 23 2011 07:56 worldsnap wrote:
You keep saying this over and over but it's still not true. While a pirated copy of something is definitely not always a lost sale (For example, i'm not going to actually rent all the movies i watch if i couldn't download them), but i sure as hell downloaded a lot of games until Steam made it even easier than pirating to get a game on release. And i'm by far not the only person in this position.
lol, I said it twice for the sake of reiteration because they selectively read my post and argued on pretty much no basis. Pirates were not consumers in the first place = "While a pirated copy of something is definitely not always a lost sale." Enough said. edit: quotations You're wrong. Pirates make many real consumers feel like suckers. This leads some of them to start pirating as well.
Personal insecurities have no value. I can claim that I feel good when I buy games as opposed to "feeling like a sucker" because I see to it that money goes to where money is well-deserved. I can coerce my friends and people within my network to purchase software too to make them also "feel good".
^ You realize your argument is a personal sentiment of yours and holds no bearing as neither does my hypothetical situation
|
K well at least they should compensate for this and give us lan latency on bnet.
|
On June 23 2011 08:10 andeh wrote:
1.6 has lan and you have to be logged into steam to play !
this guy has seemed to only look has hon and sc2 as examples of games using/not using lan
I can download pirated CS 1.6 and play online on private servers just fine if I wanted to.
|
Honestly, if blizzard is using the LAN = Piracy argument, then they shouldn't bother making single player either.
The net benefit from improving SC2 as an e-sport far outweighs any potential piracy losses IMO
|
On June 23 2011 08:03 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 07:59 SKC wrote:On June 23 2011 07:56 travis wrote:On June 23 2011 07:52 SKC wrote:On June 23 2011 07:47 travis wrote:On June 23 2011 07:40 SKC wrote:On June 23 2011 07:36 travis wrote: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. it seems like it would be crackable in the same way someone could make their own "lan bnet 2.0" already if they really really wanted to. I'm pretty sure it's a lot more complicated than that. In one of them you have bypass the "I am on bnet 2.0 checker" while the other changes the way every single bit of data is transfered. Some people were even saying you could just make them log once before playing, that's basically how the campaign works, and it was cracked instantly. I doubt it's THAT complicated. I mean you send a recieve tcp/ip packets you can just look at what is in the packets and engineer a server program based on it. And according to one guy I got a reply from, some chinese guys already did so. And according to that same guy, the only reason it's this hard is because of the way bnet 2.0 works, adding LAN would have made it a lot easier. It's hard to say anything is completelly uncrackable. Plus, this amount of control may make it a lot easier to break cracks with patching. Well you should remember the context of my original post...
Following along with this I've been thinking about how something like this could be implemented and alot of the issue comes down to that for your game client to authenticate with bnet your local files hold the key to what the game expects from a successful authentication so a fake could be set up that could convince your game that it connected to bnet.
You could complicate the authentication by all sorts of means but it would still be very crackable...
On the othe rhand, if blizzard simply wrote a script that changed a "seed" value within the authentication process and updated this locally once a week (although not that straight forward) you could make it so that pirated copies would have a very high upkeep rate to keep then running. At the very least it would require someone with a legal copy to re-crack the encryption every time it happened and for it to be redistributed to all pirated copies which would quickly make having a pirated copy just not worth the effort...
On the other hand I don't work for blizzard and its way easier for them to just leave the game as is...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
