This is not "LAN mode". It is a crack that runs SC2 through a custom Bnet server which you can run on your local PC. This means instead of connecting and routing all game traffic through official Bnet servers, you connect to a local, custom server on your (or your opponent's) PC and route traffic through that. It is more comparable to bnetd/Iccup than LAN.
Any links to the actual crack or other forms of advertising (guides how to install / run it etc) are not allowed on TL. Thanks.
seems to be a mod made by Chinese to support LAN for SC2.
There's no way this will be used in any sort of mainstream/productive manner, given how involved Blizzard is with all the major SC2 tournaments and lans.
The only way I can see LAN in SC2 is if Blizzard themselves implemented it.
What would change if there was indeed a working LAN hack? A bit more piracy perhaps. Tournaments can't use it anyway or they'd get their asses sued. LAN should have been in the game in the first place, but hacking it in doesn't help.
Wasn't this around a few months ago? Or did i miss something. It was something to do with mother/father and it was in chinese. Wait i go try the thread.
This will never be implemented in ANY even remotely big live tournament as long as its not Blizzard approveed .Blizzard would flip out guaranteed and no reputable tournament would risk it.
On July 05 2011 00:43 echO [W] wrote: They're going to get sued and shut down.
There's no way this will be used in any sort of mainstream/productive manner, given how involved Blizzard is with all the major SC2 tournaments and lans.
The only way I can see LAN in SC2 is if Blizzard themselves implemented it.
First reply hit the nail on the head. No major tournament would be able to use LAN and no minor tournaments will have the players together anyways. As long as Blizzard is remotely involved in the scene, they wont allow this to gain a foothold anywhere they can prevent it.
On July 05 2011 01:43 Scorch wrote: What would change if there was indeed a working LAN hack? A bit more piracy perhaps. Tournaments can't use it anyway or they'd get their asses sued. LAN should have been in the game in the first place, but hacking it in doesn't help.
Hacking it in successfully might force blizzard to add lan, becuase I'm guessing if you know how to torrent you'll know how to make this work. I'm guessing Blizzards strategy will have been to either wait for something like this to become popular or wait until Legacy of the Void sales dwindle completely and then add lan to "help E-Sports". I remember hearing about cracked lan quite awhile ago although it might have not been very stable or just completely bollocks.
The optimist in me can hope only good can come from this. The pessimist in me thinks nothing will change.
As much as I would love lan, am I the only one who thinks this is bad? I mean, if you wanna play this game professionally and "help e-sports" you are gonna buy it. The kids that are gonna crack it with LAN support are that leechy garena kids who are gonna pirate and hack all day long for two months, then forget about it. On the cool side, some of my friends that can't buy the game will play now, but for how long? I want more regulars that wanna learn the game for real.
I wonder how lag free it is? I mean yes obviously LAN doesn't have to deal with internet latency but they did have to hack it in, that means putting some sort of external packet capture and reroute program in place. I wonder what the actual latency is.
Even if it is true, this will never be an LAN pack for tournaments etc. It will be just for basement, underground use, just like hacked WoW private servers are. Blizzard will fight it will all their power, more fiercely than anything before. Players in Sotg said that LAN is only possible, when you can practice on it 100% of the time so that you get used to micro and response time. No respectable player would risk being banned by Blizzard just to practice on same shady mod and not playing lan on tournaments.
Maybe this will lead to an iccup style ladder since if you can hack in LAN you can hack in a new server to access right? I mean one day the bliz ladder will suck and it will be full of hackers a la WC3 and we wont be able to play great awesome GSL et al maps. This provides us hope for a 10 year life span or longer :D
If the option is out there, organizations hosting tournaments will probably be able to pressure blizzard into giving them a more stable option such as this.
I have mixed feelings on this. I feel like we should've been able to LAN since launch, and coming from a shitty connection in my house, I can't have LANs at all with friends. We've tried it. It has failed.
Then again, I would hate for the game to be used on a massive Chinese lan program and then blizzard being unable to charge for their game.
i dunno zeromus... hacking the p2p game engine is one thing but hacking the bnet engine is a whole nother ball game, given how lockdowned blizz had attempted to make it
Blizzard will never ever allow any decently sized tournament to use this, sadly. Let's just hope they make it happen in the future, MLG (and many other events) have shown a lot of times how many issues playing tournaments over battle.net brings.
no. it wont be used for tournaments. blizzard will not allow it. but heres the problem.
one great arguement for piracy is because the pirated product can often times be BETTER than the retail version. this needs to continue and i support it. why? because if people can play LAN with a cracked client what is the point of withholding it natively with support from blizzard?
by withholding it they will ensure the cracked version as a more desired version, why? because it has features that standard sc2 does not.
this is only good. just as good competition in a market drives prices down.
On July 05 2011 02:02 xarthaz wrote: i dunno zeromus... hacking the p2p game engine is one thing but hacking the bnet engine is a whole nother ball game, given how lockdowned blizz had attempted to make it
Hey man this is one step, what if instead of P2P through LAN it uses an external server to talk to people across the world instead of through a LAN connection. I'm not a tech junkie by any means but if one hack can be created to bypass playing on BNET servers, then something else can be created to the same effect with regards to an online server could it not?
Also, if people start wanting a cracked version it may force blizzard to up their game and put in what people are otherwise willing to pay for. I for one would rather pay for a LAN edition or cross server SC2 than rely on a hacked version. Maybe they can implement 3rd party ladder systems into BNET 2.0 with providers like ICCUP and we can play Bliz ladder or ICCUP/GSL maps ladder.
for people who have no real way of paying for the game, unless you live in south korea , this is the only way to play sc2 and for them I am happy(if this actually works). For the rest of us who are somewhat interested in the competetive aspect of the scene I guess it wont change much, maybe if on lan and without an internet connection but still wanna mess around with a few games of sc2.
Yeah, well lan support is a killer feature, so the ball is on blizz's court on what theyre gonna do. if they wont do anything then this thing will probably take the eastern europe & asia market by storm and establish big online scene for it, like private wow server market has.
On July 05 2011 01:43 Scorch wrote: What would change if there was indeed a working LAN hack? A bit more piracy perhaps. Tournaments can't use it anyway or they'd get their asses sued. LAN should have been in the game in the first place, but hacking it in doesn't help.
It certainly shows that... (wait for it) the technology is there for it.
ok if we cant have links can we atleast have a name?? its kind of pointless having a thread if noone knows how to find more information...
MOD EDIT: There is a giant explanation of what not to do, and you're doing it. Given your insanely long ban history, I'd thought you'd be more careful.
i think this tool is in an very early stage of development. Nice one though, but nowadays, whos carrying his machine to ones other house in times of skype, ts, bnet2.0 anyways oO.
On July 05 2011 02:16 Lephex wrote: i think this tool is in an very early stage of development. Nice one though, but nowadays, whos carrying his machine to ones other house in times of skype, ts, bnet2.0 anyways oO.
Cool people are, seriously though, nothing compares to sitting in a room with 20 other dudes, smoking weed, drinking beers and playing games.
the problem is that this kind of lan is kinda useless as no big tournaments will be able to use it as they need to work with blizzard and what's the point if you have to play on lag when the big tournaments come around? It wont even help you in any positive way.
On July 05 2011 01:53 Kishuu wrote: As much as I would love lan, am I the only one who thinks this is bad? I mean, if you wanna play this game professionally and "help e-sports" you are gonna buy it. The kids that are gonna crack it with LAN support are that leechy garena kids who are gonna pirate and hack all day long for two months, then forget about it. On the cool side, some of my friends that can't buy the game will play now, but for how long? I want more regulars that wanna learn the game for real.
People here don't want LAN support because they can crack it easier (I hope). People here want LAN support because they are sick of watching lag spikes disturbing high level games, where the gamers are actually sitting next to each other.
On July 05 2011 02:22 JustPassingBy wrote: People here don't want LAN support because they can crack it easier (I hope).
That doesn't even make sense.
By the way, the site activated my bullshit detector. The guy who 'popularises' the 'crack' seems to be French, not Chinese. The site is really pretty and already finished... no, no, no, that's not how I recall cracks to be spread. Also, the guy said on reddit: "First I was like you, blabla, didn't believe it either, but then *tadaa*". Only thing left for him to say is "works like a charm".
On July 05 2011 02:16 gurrpp wrote: My main hope is that we may get a private server out of this which lets people play internationally with low latency.
The pirated server will probably have little effect on the internationall latency if by that you mean latency between NA-Korea or NA-Europe since the data packets still have to travel the same distance.
On July 05 2011 02:16 gurrpp wrote: My main hope is that we may get a private server out of this which lets people play internationally with low latency.
The pirated server will probably have little effect on the internationall latency if by that you mean latency between NA-Korea or NA-Europe since the data packets still have to travel the same distance.
Incorrect, because this time the data wouldn't be 'rerouted' through Blizz' servers.
On July 05 2011 01:53 Kishuu wrote: As much as I would love lan, am I the only one who thinks this is bad? I mean, if you wanna play this game professionally and "help e-sports" you are gonna buy it. The kids that are gonna crack it with LAN support are that leechy garena kids who are gonna pirate and hack all day long for two months, then forget about it. On the cool side, some of my friends that can't buy the game will play now, but for how long? I want more regulars that wanna learn the game for real.
People here don't want LAN support because they can crack it easier (I hope). People here want LAN support because they are sick of watching lag spikes disturbing high level games, where the gamers are actually sitting next to each other.
I'd love to play LAN without lag, believe me. It will happen now, I guess. But the side effects are horrible. Because your hopes are not matched with the reality. When something is cracked, it will be available under hamachi/garena and even more hacks are gonna be developed, becase the game will be more popular. Drop hacking was pretty bad last week right? Well, everyone get ready because if this flies off, more and more hacks are gonna show up. And it will be even more annoying to play ladder, cracked or not.
You can compare with iccup and everything. but they have an anti-hack system AND, EVEN more importantly, people that play there wanna play the game, they don't wanna fuck around with hacks, at least the huge majority. The D- ladder on iccup bw equals mid diamond on NA ladder sc2, for instance. There are no D, D- idiots drop hacking to A+ in iccup, believe me.
So it is like, yay we can play lan! but on the other hand, we are gonna be fucked with new hacks more oftenly, have a decentralized userbase and we'll have to watch this blizzard/hacker cat and mouse thing for a while. Is this positive at the end of the day? Well, that everyone would have to balance out and decide for themselves. I think it is bad in the long run, my 2c.
On July 05 2011 01:53 Kishuu wrote: As much as I would love lan, am I the only one who thinks this is bad? I mean, if you wanna play this game professionally and "help e-sports" you are gonna buy it. The kids that are gonna crack it with LAN support are that leechy garena kids who are gonna pirate and hack all day long for two months, then forget about it. On the cool side, some of my friends that can't buy the game will play now, but for how long? I want more regulars that wanna learn the game for real.
People here don't want LAN support because they can crack it easier (I hope). People here want LAN support because they are sick of watching lag spikes disturbing high level games, where the gamers are actually sitting next to each other.
All I want is Blizzard to make a tournament LAN type thing, they can only give it to the biggest events if they want and have their own people put it in take it out, have complete oversight, but at least GSL, MLG, Dreamhack, etc... will have real LANs.
I think something will be done about tournaments sooner or later. The Esports community and organizations is much bigger than Blizzard's casual or ingrown crowd and thus have more influence and such will pressure Blizzard. The great thing about SC2 is that it transcends such authority so to speak, but I think it will get done by Blizzard because of them being pressured into it. I hope I articulated that correctly.
On July 05 2011 02:22 JustPassingBy wrote: People here don't want LAN support because they can crack it easier (I hope).
That doesn't even make sense.
By the way, the site activated my bullshit detector. The guy who 'popularises' the 'crack' seems to be French, not Chinese. The site is really pretty and already finished... no, no, no, that's not how I recall cracks to be spread. Also, the guy said on reddit: "First I was like you, blabla, didn't believe it either, but then *tadaa*". Only thing left for him to say is "works like a charm".
Well, you can download the thing from his site and try. Since the crack seems to be only usable with the chinese version the French guy is most likely not the author but is just trying to spread it.
Not saying is can't be all BS because of that, but I don't really see the point in faking everything, screenshots and demonstration videos included, if it will all be busted by the first guy who downloads and tries the thing.
On July 05 2011 02:22 JustPassingBy wrote: People here don't WanT LAN support because they can crack it easier (I hope).
That doesn't even make Sense.
By the Way, the site activated my bullshit detector. The guy WhO 'popularises' the 'crack' seems to be French, not Chinese. The site iS Really pretty and already finished... no, no, no, that's not how I recall cracks to be spread. Also, the guy SaiD on reddit: "First I was like you, blabla, didn't believe it either, but then *tadaa*". Only thing left for him to say iS "works like a charm".
I found it on reddit and did not see a thread here, so I made ONE. Dont be paranoiac.
My take is that blizzard might realize that they can FighT as hard as they WanT, but they cannot outmsmart a whole community. Now they can either accept that their game iS not longer totaly their game but also our game, and maybe work with the community ( for better maps, for a better battle.net, for a lan support, for... game design ( WhO SaiD reavers, mines and Lurker?? ) and have a GREAT game that will last long....
On July 05 2011 02:22 JustPassingBy wrote: People here don't WanT LAN support because they can crack it easier (I hope).
That doesn't even make Sense.
By the Way, the site activated my bullshit detector. The guy WhO 'popularises' the 'crack' seems to be French, not Chinese. The site iS Really pretty and already finished... no, no, no, that's not how I recall cracks to be spread. Also, the guy SaiD on reddit: "First I was like you, blabla, didn't believe it either, but then *tadaa*". Only thing left for him to say iS "works like a charm".
I found it on reddit and did see a thread here, so I made ONE. Dont be paranoiac.
My take is that blizzard might realize that they can FighT as hard as they WanT, but they cannot outmsmart a whole community. Now they can either accept that their game iS not longer totaly their game but also our game, and maybe work with the community ( for better maps, for a better battle.net, for a lan support, for... game design ( WhO SaiD reavers, mines and Lurker?? ) and have a GREAT game that will last long....
I'm not saying the crack doesn't work, I'm saying this guy exhibits suspicious behaviour.
Why did you randomly capitalise letters in (your quote of) my post (as well as yours)? It's very displeasing to the eye.
On July 05 2011 01:53 Kishuu wrote: As much as I would love lan, am I the only one who thinks this is bad? I mean, if you wanna play this game professionally and "help e-sports" you are gonna buy it. The kids that are gonna crack it with LAN support are that leechy garena kids who are gonna pirate and hack all day long for two months, then forget about it. On the cool side, some of my friends that can't buy the game will play now, but for how long? I want more regulars that wanna learn the game for real.
People here don't want LAN support because they can crack it easier (I hope). People here want LAN support because they are sick of watching lag spikes disturbing high level games, where the gamers are actually sitting next to each other.
I'd love to play LAN without lag, believe me. It will happen now, I guess. But the side effects are horrible. Because your hopes are not matched with the reality. When something is cracked, it will be available under hamachi/garena and even more hacks are gonna be developed, becase the game will be more popular. Drop hacking was pretty bad last week right? Well, everyone get ready because if this flies off, more and more hacks are gonna show up. And it will be even more annoying to play ladder, cracked or not.
You can compare with iccup and everything. but they have an anti-hack system AND, EVEN more importantly, people that play there wanna play the game, they don't wanna fuck around with hacks, at least the huge majority. The D- ladder on iccup bw equals mid diamond on NA ladder sc2, for instance. There are no D, D- idiots drop hacking to A+ in iccup, believe me.
So it is like, yay we can play lan! but on the other hand, we are gonna be fucked with new hacks more oftenly, have a decentralized userbase and we'll have to watch this blizzard/hacker cat and mouse thing for a while. Is this positive at the end of the day? Well, that everyone would have to balance out and decide for themselves. I think it is bad in the long run, my 2c.
ok i started to type up a reply explaining why you are wrong, but your post reeks of so much cluelessness that my brain just started hurting trying to refute your weird-ass arguments.
No this will not hurt ESPORTS, no this will not mean blizzard ladder will be more infested with hackers, maybe the private servers will be, but why should you care?
edit:
btw in the chat channel the french guy who made the site, Serutan, just said that he's uploaded it to the servers of a web-forum where you can find hacks / free VODs and the like for SC2, who will do a review on the LAN server, they apparently already have chinese people waiting to try it out. (You need the chinese sc2 client atm)
Fun trivia, the creater of the LAN server apparently gets called the 'Boss'.
How is this against the ToS, when these Terms fo Service are for using Battle.net?. The whole point of this mod is not to use Battle.net. Ergo, ToS do not apply. yay!
I know that this is more complex and that in some law systems it is much more dangerous than in others, but saying that it is outright illegal is way too much ass-climbing. Given that TL is hosted in the US, its understandable they don't want even to link to this, because - well they are in a very special law system, aren't they? But in some other countries, I can see tournaments running on this, much as playing BW on LAN. And we may be suprirised even in the US - look at what happened around iphone jalibreaking!
I am 100% happy about this, we need every single bit of evidence that the resistence of software makers is futile, that every "anti-piracy" measure they take will turn against them in the long run. The fact that we have to play through crappy Battle.net, because some managers are stupid enough to believe that it actualy helps them in makeing profit, is outrageous.
On July 05 2011 02:22 JustPassingBy wrote: People here don't WanT LAN support because they can crack it easier (I hope).
That doesn't even make Sense.
By the Way, the site activated my bullshit detector. The guy WhO 'popularises' the 'crack' seems to be French, not Chinese. The site iS Really pretty and already finished... no, no, no, that's not how I recall cracks to be spread. Also, the guy SaiD on reddit: "First I was like you, blabla, didn't believe it either, but then *tadaa*". Only thing left for him to say iS "works like a charm".
I found it on reddit and did see a thread here, so I made ONE. Dont be paranoiac.
My take is that blizzard might realize that they can FighT as hard as they WanT, but they cannot outmsmart a whole community. Now they can either accept that their game iS not longer totaly their game but also our game, and maybe work with the community ( for better maps, for a better battle.net, for a lan support, for... game design ( WhO SaiD reavers, mines and Lurker?? ) and have a GREAT game that will last long....
I'm not saying the crack doesn't work, I'm saying this guy exhibits suspicious behaviour.
Why did you randomly capitalise letters in (your quote of) my post (as well as yours)? It's very displeasing to the eye.
Holy crap, I thought he was mocking you but he actually changed your post. That's the dumbest thing I've seen in a while.
On July 05 2011 02:22 JustPassingBy wrote: People here don't WanT LAN support because they can crack it easier (I hope).
That doesn't even make Sense.
By the Way, the site activated my bullshit detector. The guy WhO 'popularises' the 'crack' seems to be French, not Chinese. The site iS Really pretty and already finished... no, no, no, that's not how I recall cracks to be spread. Also, the guy SaiD on reddit: "First I was like you, blabla, didn't believe it either, but then *tadaa*". Only thing left for him to say iS "works like a charm".
I found it on reddit and did see a thread here, so I made ONE. Dont be paranoiac.
My take is that blizzard might realize that they can FighT as hard as they WanT, but they cannot outmsmart a whole community. Now they can either accept that their game iS not longer totaly their game but also our game, and maybe work with the community ( for better maps, for a better battle.net, for a lan support, for... game design ( WhO SaiD reavers, mines and Lurker?? ) and have a GREAT game that will last long....
I'm not saying the crack doesn't work, I'm saying this guy exhibits suspicious behaviour.
Why did you randomly capitalise letters in (your quote of) my post (as well as yours)? It's very displeasing to the eye.
I have not idea, it was not like that when I wrote it... Think it has to do with tlpide / de-tlpdize :o
Despite the availability of Battle.net server emulation programs, Blizzard will not make LAN available, so I don't see the point in hoping. Piracy is just an excuse made up by clueless people. It has nothing to do with Blizzard's real reasons. Implementing LAN after this will only make two options available for circumventing Battle.net instead of one, meaning even less potential growth income from future Battle.net features. The price of the game is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.
On July 05 2011 02:49 opisska wrote: How is this against the ToS, when these Terms fo Service are for using Battle.net?. The whole point of this mod is not to use Battle.net. Ergo, ToS do not apply. yay!
I know that this is more complex and that in some law systems it is much more dangerous than in others, but saying that it is outright illegal is way too much ass-climbing. Given that TL is hosted in the US, its understandable they don't want even to link to this, because - well they are in a very special law system, aren't they? But in some other countries, I can see tournaments running on this, much as playing BW on LAN. And we may be suprirised even in the US - look at what happened around iphone jalibreaking!
I am 100% happy about this, we need every single bit of evidence that the resistence of software makers is futile, that every "anti-piracy" measure they take will turn against them in the long run. The fact that we have to play through crappy Battle.net, because some managers are stupid enough to believe that it actualy helps them in makeing profit, is outrageous.
No, this is 100% illegal, if anything they are infringing on Blizzard's intellectual property copyrights with the server-code they are distributing. Also there will 100% be a some paragraph in the ToS that talks about hosting a private server that allows people to play Starcraft2(TM)
On July 05 2011 01:53 Kishuu wrote: As much as I would love lan, am I the only one who thinks this is bad? I mean, if you wanna play this game professionally and "help e-sports" you are gonna buy it. The kids that are gonna crack it with LAN support are that leechy garena kids who are gonna pirate and hack all day long for two months, then forget about it. On the cool side, some of my friends that can't buy the game will play now, but for how long? I want more regulars that wanna learn the game for real.
People here don't want LAN support because they can crack it easier (I hope). People here want LAN support because they are sick of watching lag spikes disturbing high level games, where the gamers are actually sitting next to each other.
I'd love to play LAN without lag, believe me. It will happen now, I guess. But the side effects are horrible. Because your hopes are not matched with the reality. When something is cracked, it will be available under hamachi/garena and even more hacks are gonna be developed, becase the game will be more popular. Drop hacking was pretty bad last week right? Well, everyone get ready because if this flies off, more and more hacks are gonna show up. And it will be even more annoying to play ladder, cracked or not.
You can compare with iccup and everything. but they have an anti-hack system AND, EVEN more importantly, people that play there wanna play the game, they don't wanna fuck around with hacks, at least the huge majority. The D- ladder on iccup bw equals mid diamond on NA ladder sc2, for instance. There are no D, D- idiots drop hacking to A+ in iccup, believe me.
So it is like, yay we can play lan! but on the other hand, we are gonna be fucked with new hacks more oftenly, have a decentralized userbase and we'll have to watch this blizzard/hacker cat and mouse thing for a while. Is this positive at the end of the day? Well, that everyone would have to balance out and decide for themselves. I think it is bad in the long run, my 2c.
ok i started to type up a reply explaining why you are wrong, but your post reeks of so much cluelessness that my brain just started hurting trying to refute your weird-ass arguments.
No this will not hurt ESPORTS, no this will not mean blizzard ladder will be more infested with hackers, maybe the private servers will be, but why should you care?
edit:
btw in the chat channel the french guy who made the site, Serutan, just said that he's uploaded it to the servers of a web-forum where you can find hacks / free VODs and the like for SC2, who will do a review on the LAN server, they apparently already have chinese people waiting to try it out. (You need the chinese sc2 client atm)
Fun trivia, the creater of the LAN server apparently gets called the 'Boss'.
Well, maybe while your brain was hurting you missed the fact that I never mentioned esports in my post. And yes, if you think that I am clueless about what am I saying please refrain from posting anything further.
BnetD for SC2 is great news. Maybe we can get some of that eSports within community control again instead of being lorded over by Blizzard at all times.
On July 05 2011 02:22 JustPassingBy wrote: People here don't WanT LAN support because they can crack it easier (I hope).
That doesn't even make Sense.
By the Way, the site activated my bullshit detector. The guy WhO 'popularises' the 'crack' seems to be French, not Chinese. The site iS Really pretty and already finished... no, no, no, that's not how I recall cracks to be spread. Also, the guy SaiD on reddit: "First I was like you, blabla, didn't believe it either, but then *tadaa*". Only thing left for him to say iS "works like a charm".
I found it on reddit and did not see a thread here, so I made ONE. Dont be paranoiac.
My take is that blizzard might realize that they can FighT as hard as they WanT, but they cannot outmsmart a whole community. Now they can either accept that their game iS not longer totaly their game but also our game, and maybe work with the community ( for better maps, for a better battle.net, for a lan support, for... game design ( WhO SaiD reavers, mines and Lurker?? ) and have a GREAT game that will last long....
I just know there is something to this post. I'm dedicating the next hour trying to crack your code. :-D
The only way blizzard will add lan, is if everybody stop pirating everything. Since that will likely never happen you can guess what the answer to when they will add lan is. PC gamers as a community brought this on themselves (also almost killed PC gaming).
On July 05 2011 03:11 ThePimpImp wrote: The only way blizzard will add lan, is if everybody stop pirating everything. Since that will likely never happen you can guess what the answer to when they will add lan is. PC gamers as a community brought this on themselves (also almost killed PC gaming).
people keep posting this point of view and i really dont understand it blizzard dont implement it, so community does. this is a better situation then having lan in sc2 retail?
Game over, Blizzard. You refused to give us lan, so we did it ourselves. You tried to keep the power and it didn't work.
There are a ton of private wow servers and Blizzard hasn't been able to take them down. Wow makes a lot more money than sc2 does, so I really think that this is gonna work out really well for us. This is a huge turning point for the community!
On July 05 2011 03:14 Yaotzin wrote: I don't get the appeal really, BW era matchmaking is horrible.
Obviously no tournament will touch this or they'll get sued.
Good for the cheapskates who don't buy the game I guess.
If I wanna play a game with friends from NA, and I don't necessarily feel like spending 60 bucks just to do that, the LAN version is an obvious possibility.
If this gets more popular I can see some pros using this to play out cross-server matches instead of playing with huge lag. I mean, neither tournaments nor Blizzard will be able to punish players for using the LAN version and the replays will look just like BNet replays.
There are plenty of private servers for other games (WoW, MapleStory, etcetc) there's certainly appeal to it, at the moment the question is more, how dedicated are the developers and will we see a working english version for this?
On July 05 2011 03:14 Yaotzin wrote: I don't get the appeal really, BW era matchmaking is horrible.
Obviously no tournament will touch this or they'll get sued.
Good for the cheapskates who don't buy the game I guess.
If I wanna play a game with friends from NA, and I don't necessarily feel like spending 60 bucks just to do that, the LAN version is an obvious possibility.
Yeah I guess for casual stuff. I was thinking from a competitive perspective.
If this gets more popular I can see some pros using this to play out cross-server matches instead of playing with huge lag. I mean, neither tournaments nor Blizzard will be able to punish players for using the LAN version and the replays will look just like BNet replays.
I guess they might for non-casted games. For anything directly tournament run there's zero chance. No sponsor, and therefore no half decent tournament, will touch this with a barge pole.
There are plenty of private servers for other games (WoW, MapleStory, etcetc) there's certainly appeal to it, at the moment the question is more, how dedicated are the developers and will we see a working english version for this?
The appeal is almost entirely for people who are cheap and refuse to buy the game/pay the subscription, though. I'm sure cracked LAN in SC2 is good for such people, but for anyone who's already bought it? Not that much use.
aside: Is it LAN or just a locally run server? I'm guessing the latter? AFAIK SC2 doesn't even have LAN code to crack. Though the OP says its a 3rd party run server which would be kinda useless..
what you do is go to an internet cafe, upload the software as open source and blizzard will forever in lost: cant sue and the software is always available. Sueing, threatening is not a solution for cases like this.
On 1 of the anti blizzard website, a guy has confirmed that the LAN version for english client will be available before august. If blizzard dont act quick they will not only lose on the chinese and SEA market. Just wait until a russian hacker get there hand on this and make it suit for ICCUP sever and blizzard can never shut it down as they cant for BW and war3
Everything we wanted and never got from bliz. The only thing they did give us is chat channels without any functions. And you guys think its not a big deal? When there is a good version out with server list and everything it will be used! Whoever create this mod, THX dude.
All of you talking about how they're going to be "Sued into oblivion" clearly have no understanding of past precedent with China and copyright law.
Love Team Fortress 2? Enjoy Battlefield: Heroes?
Final Combat, a Chinese developed game straight-out steals maps from Battlefield Heroes, and pulls weapons/class models straight from TF2 to make their 'new' game.
Nothing can be done about it. The Chinese rarely respect international copyright laws.
This will survive in China so long as it's supported -- and with China's quite sizable e-sports community, (Based on the turnouts for Brood War competitions held there) it could get a ton of popularity.
On July 05 2011 03:14 Yaotzin wrote: I don't get the appeal really, BW era matchmaking is horrible.
Obviously no tournament will touch this or they'll get sued.
Good for the cheapskates who don't buy the game I guess.
If I wanna play a game with friends from NA, and I don't necessarily feel like spending 60 bucks just to do that, the LAN version is an obvious possibility.
Yeah I guess for casual stuff. I was thinking from a competitive perspective.
If this gets more popular I can see some pros using this to play out cross-server matches instead of playing with huge lag. I mean, neither tournaments nor Blizzard will be able to punish players for using the LAN version and the replays will look just like BNet replays.
I guess they might for non-casted games. For anything directly tournament run there's zero chance. No sponsor, and therefore no half decent tournament, will touch this with a barge pole.
There are plenty of private servers for other games (WoW, MapleStory, etcetc) there's certainly appeal to it, at the moment the question is more, how dedicated are the developers and will we see a working english version for this?
The appeal is almost entirely for people who are cheap and refuse to buy the game/pay the subscription, though. I'm sure cracked LAN in SC2 is good for such people, but for anyone who's already bought it? Not that much use.
aside: Is it LAN or just a locally run server? I'm guessing the latter? AFAIK SC2 doesn't even have LAN code.
Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
On July 05 2011 03:29 Ryhn wrote: This will survive in China so long as it's supported -- and with China's quite sizable e-sports community, (Based on the turnouts for Brood War competitions held there) it could get a ton of popularity.
The difference is that SC2 is still being actively developed. Blizzard can just release patches and then expansions that completely break this.
On July 05 2011 03:29 skeldark wrote: less lag less latency cross server play
Everything we wanted and never got from bliz. The only thing they did give us is chat channels without any functions. And you guys think its not a big deal? When there is a good version out with server list and everything it will be used! Whoever create this mod, THX dude.
Lag and latency is the same thing. Blizz gave us the actual game AND sponsored alot of tournaments.
Well if it gets really popular and then put on a site like piratebay, and just spreads a bunch. Not really much anyone can do to stop it. Especially with no real consequence for the people who use it? /
On July 05 2011 03:29 Ryhn wrote: This will survive in China so long as it's supported -- and with China's quite sizable e-sports community, (Based on the turnouts for Brood War competitions held there) it could get a ton of popularity.
The difference is that SC2 is still being actively developed. Blizzard can just release patches and then expansions that completely break this.
and they actively devolop there mod. they can jsut realease patches and then expansions that completeley make it possible again. Its an old old story and until now there was allways 1 winner and 1 looser. I cant remember tho that it was the gamemakers who won 1 time ^^
On July 05 2011 02:49 opisska wrote: How is this against the ToS, when these Terms fo Service are for using Battle.net?. The whole point of this mod is not to use Battle.net. Ergo, ToS do not apply. yay!
I know that this is more complex and that in some law systems it is much more dangerous than in others, but saying that it is outright illegal is way too much ass-climbing. Given that TL is hosted in the US, its understandable they don't want even to link to this, because - well they are in a very special law system, aren't they? But in some other countries, I can see tournaments running on this, much as playing BW on LAN. And we may be suprirised even in the US - look at what happened around iphone jalibreaking!
I am 100% happy about this, we need every single bit of evidence that the resistence of software makers is futile, that every "anti-piracy" measure they take will turn against them in the long run. The fact that we have to play through crappy Battle.net, because some managers are stupid enough to believe that it actualy helps them in makeing profit, is outrageous.
No, this is 100% illegal, if anything they are infringing on Blizzard's intellectual property copyrights with the server-code they are distributing. Also there will 100% be a some paragraph in the ToS that talks about hosting a private server that allows people to play Starcraft2(TM)
Whey did they get the server-code? If they stole it from Blizz, then hell yes, that's not OK. But do we know that? If they wrote it, its theirs, period.
And fot the ToS - if there was a paragraph saying that you cannot think about horses while playing starcraft, would doing so be illegal? Certain legal systems limit the applicability of certain types of contracts. Any statute in such contract the transcedes these limits is automaticaly void. So it is a question of a particulalr legal setting, whether Blizzard is or is not able to prevent you from hosting such server.
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
On July 05 2011 02:49 opisska wrote: How is this against the ToS, when these Terms fo Service are for using Battle.net?. The whole point of this mod is not to use Battle.net. Ergo, ToS do not apply. yay!
I know that this is more complex and that in some law systems it is much more dangerous than in others, but saying that it is outright illegal is way too much ass-climbing. Given that TL is hosted in the US, its understandable they don't want even to link to this, because - well they are in a very special law system, aren't they? But in some other countries, I can see tournaments running on this, much as playing BW on LAN. And we may be suprirised even in the US - look at what happened around iphone jalibreaking!
I am 100% happy about this, we need every single bit of evidence that the resistence of software makers is futile, that every "anti-piracy" measure they take will turn against them in the long run. The fact that we have to play through crappy Battle.net, because some managers are stupid enough to believe that it actualy helps them in makeing profit, is outrageous.
No, this is 100% illegal, if anything they are infringing on Blizzard's intellectual property copyrights with the server-code they are distributing. Also there will 100% be a some paragraph in the ToS that talks about hosting a private server that allows people to play Starcraft2(TM)
Whey did they get the server-code? If they stole it from Blizz, then hell yes, that's not OK. But do we know that? If they wrote it, its theirs, period.
And fot the ToS - if there was a paragraph saying that you cannot think about horses while playing starcraft, would doing so be illegal? Certain legal systems limit the applicability of certain types of contracts. Any statute in such contract the transcedes these limits is automaticaly void. So it is a question of a particulalr legal setting, whether Blizzard is or is not able to prevent you from hosting such server.
your not allowed to change the source code of a program Its is illegal and will be used....
On July 05 2011 03:29 Ryhn wrote: This will survive in China so long as it's supported -- and with China's quite sizable e-sports community, (Based on the turnouts for Brood War competitions held there) it could get a ton of popularity.
The difference is that SC2 is still being actively developed. Blizzard can just release patches and then expansions that completely break this.
They certainly will, but - in the future - with their foot already in the door and people using it, the developers will just patch in response and get it to work again. This has happened time and time again in other games and it's almost never the case that patching stops the private servers. People can after all just play the old version if need be.
I wish blizzard would just have big tournaments use some kind of LAN option designed by blizzard. Have a blizzard employee run and guard it or something, but so at least the big tournaments like MLG and GSL dont have to rely on the stability of the intrawebs to be successful.
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
2) Yes it's possible and I already explained why I would use a private server over this one.
On July 05 2011 03:29 Ryhn wrote: This will survive in China so long as it's supported -- and with China's quite sizable e-sports community, (Based on the turnouts for Brood War competitions held there) it could get a ton of popularity.
The difference is that SC2 is still being actively developed. Blizzard can just release patches and then expansions that completely break this.
They certainly will, but - in the future - with their foot already in the door and people using it, the developers will just patch in response and get it to work again. This has happened time and time again in other games and it's almost never the case that patching stops the private servers. People can after all just play the old version if need be.
Yet patching is slower and lags behind the real release. WoW/Lineage 2 private servers were like that for ages. Wanna play for free? Then take what you can get and watch paying customers have access to the patches/content way before you do. Kinda sucks in a game where balance changes and expansions will affect playstyles alot.
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
you dont understand it. Its way more than a crack. if its not a fake its an OWN server. So you can pick server and dont have to tunnel everything throw bliz, i can play with a guy in a lan on a server in the lan. its much faster than me - bliz - computer next to me me - server on my computer - computer next to me
On July 05 2011 02:49 opisska wrote: How is this against the ToS, when these Terms fo Service are for using Battle.net?. The whole point of this mod is not to use Battle.net. Ergo, ToS do not apply. yay!
I know that this is more complex and that in some law systems it is much more dangerous than in others, but saying that it is outright illegal is way too much ass-climbing. Given that TL is hosted in the US, its understandable they don't want even to link to this, because - well they are in a very special law system, aren't they? But in some other countries, I can see tournaments running on this, much as playing BW on LAN. And we may be suprirised even in the US - look at what happened around iphone jalibreaking!
I am 100% happy about this, we need every single bit of evidence that the resistence of software makers is futile, that every "anti-piracy" measure they take will turn against them in the long run. The fact that we have to play through crappy Battle.net, because some managers are stupid enough to believe that it actualy helps them in makeing profit, is outrageous.
No, this is 100% illegal, if anything they are infringing on Blizzard's intellectual property copyrights with the server-code they are distributing. Also there will 100% be a some paragraph in the ToS that talks about hosting a private server that allows people to play Starcraft2(TM)
Whey did they get the server-code? If they stole it from Blizz, then hell yes, that's not OK. But do we know that? If they wrote it, its theirs, period.
And fot the ToS - if there was a paragraph saying that you cannot think about horses while playing starcraft, would doing so be illegal? Certain legal systems limit the applicability of certain types of contracts. Any statute in such contract the transcedes these limits is automaticaly void. So it is a question of a particulalr legal setting, whether Blizzard is or is not able to prevent you from hosting such server.
your not allowed to change the source code of a program Its is illegal and will be used....
This is not the case in every country in the world. The fact that it is illegal in many does not mean, that I can't go to a sutiably chosen place and do it there.
Legal issues aside, the fact, that it is the case in many others, makes me cry before going to bed.
On July 05 2011 02:49 opisska wrote: How is this against the ToS, when these Terms fo Service are for using Battle.net?. The whole point of this mod is not to use Battle.net. Ergo, ToS do not apply. yay!
I know that this is more complex and that in some law systems it is much more dangerous than in others, but saying that it is outright illegal is way too much ass-climbing. Given that TL is hosted in the US, its understandable they don't want even to link to this, because - well they are in a very special law system, aren't they? But in some other countries, I can see tournaments running on this, much as playing BW on LAN. And we may be suprirised even in the US - look at what happened around iphone jalibreaking!
I am 100% happy about this, we need every single bit of evidence that the resistence of software makers is futile, that every "anti-piracy" measure they take will turn against them in the long run. The fact that we have to play through crappy Battle.net, because some managers are stupid enough to believe that it actualy helps them in makeing profit, is outrageous.
No, this is 100% illegal, if anything they are infringing on Blizzard's intellectual property copyrights with the server-code they are distributing. Also there will 100% be a some paragraph in the ToS that talks about hosting a private server that allows people to play Starcraft2(TM)
Whey did they get the server-code? If they stole it from Blizz, then hell yes, that's not OK. But do we know that? If they wrote it, its theirs, period.
And fot the ToS - if there was a paragraph saying that you cannot think about horses while playing starcraft, would doing so be illegal? Certain legal systems limit the applicability of certain types of contracts. Any statute in such contract the transcedes these limits is automaticaly void. So it is a question of a particulalr legal setting, whether Blizzard is or is not able to prevent you from hosting such server.
your not allowed to change the source code of a program Its is illegal and will be used....
This is not the case in every country in the world. The fact that it is illegal in many does not mean, that I can't go to a sutiably chosen place and do it there.
Legal issues aside, the fact, that it is the case in many others, makes me cry before going to bed.
true. i know in germany its illegal. the point is the client must changed too. So to be legal you have to move to this country to play ^^
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
Direct connections also brings up the problem of the player running the server having no latency....
2) Yes it's possible and I already explained why I would use a private server over this one.
How is it possible to have matchmaking without a centralised server
It was never if this would happen, only when. When Blizzard takes a position of trying to squeeze out every dime they can from it's customers(do we really need to buy a new, separate copy of the game to play on another server? really?), I find it easy for us to assume LAN will never come. Not from Blizzard, anyway. They'd lose dollars. But, for an overwhelming majority of its players, LAN is what we want, not to mention a better map-making team/UI/more.
On July 05 2011 01:53 Kishuu wrote: As much as I would love lan, am I the only one who thinks this is bad? I mean, if you wanna play this game professionally and "help e-sports" you are gonna buy it. The kids that are gonna crack it with LAN support are that leechy garena kids who are gonna pirate and hack all day long for two months, then forget about it. On the cool side, some of my friends that can't buy the game will play now, but for how long? I want more regulars that wanna learn the game for real.
buying this game just gives blizz $. $ that they already have, money that they dont spend to make esports better . WE, THE PLAYERS are the only thing esports has. we support it not Blizz.
but i do agree, pirating the game overall is bad. realistically, if people liek SC2, $65 for the game is reasonable due to how much play time you get out of it.
On July 05 2011 03:29 Ryhn wrote: This will survive in China so long as it's supported -- and with China's quite sizable e-sports community, (Based on the turnouts for Brood War competitions held there) it could get a ton of popularity.
The difference is that SC2 is still being actively developed. Blizzard can just release patches and then expansions that completely break this.
They certainly will, but - in the future - with their foot already in the door and people using it, the developers will just patch in response and get it to work again. This has happened time and time again in other games and it's almost never the case that patching stops the private servers. People can after all just play the old version if need be.
Yet patching is slower and lags behind the real release. WoW/Lineage 2 private servers were like that for ages. Wanna play for free? Then take what you can get and watch paying customers have access to the patches/content way before you do. Kinda sucks in a game where balance changes and expansions will affect playstyles alot.
... It's not about playing for free. At least not for me. This is a good thing, I want to have more choices rather than less, all the ways Blizzard fucked up BattleNet 2.0 can be fixed through this. Many many people have already explained how BNet2.0 is a step backwards with a TON of features missing, so I don't think I have to reiterate, but for chrissakes, we still have Delta Quadrant in the map-pool.
On July 05 2011 01:53 Kishuu wrote: As much as I would love lan, am I the only one who thinks this is bad? I mean, if you wanna play this game professionally and "help e-sports" you are gonna buy it. The kids that are gonna crack it with LAN support are that leechy garena kids who are gonna pirate and hack all day long for two months, then forget about it. On the cool side, some of my friends that can't buy the game will play now, but for how long? I want more regulars that wanna learn the game for real.
buying this game just gives blizz $. $ that they already have, money that they dont spend to make esports better . WE, THE PLAYERS are the only thing esports has. we support it not Blizz.
but i do agree, pirating the game overall is bad. realistically, if people liek SC2, $65 for the game is reasonable due to how much play time you get out of it.
You do realize that Blizzard sponsors tournaments all the time and spend alot time and money on developing the game after initial release? Some people on these forums...
Are the people doubting the better latency just people new to rts or something? Must not have been bw players. Iccup was drastically less lag than bnet. It's proven that it is possible to hugely reduce lag using 3rd party programs. And as this gets more popular, they will certainlycertainly attract others to help with keeping up with patches etc.
Everyone making this possible are heroes. You have my sincerest thanks
On July 05 2011 03:44 RoyalCheese wrote: Will be C&D-ed soon enough. And rightfully so.
Just like all of the private wow servers with thousands of users? What are you even talking about? What would make you think Blizzard is even capable of it? If they can't defend their massive cash generator, they can't defend sc2.
On July 05 2011 03:29 Ryhn wrote: This will survive in China so long as it's supported -- and with China's quite sizable e-sports community, (Based on the turnouts for Brood War competitions held there) it could get a ton of popularity.
The difference is that SC2 is still being actively developed. Blizzard can just release patches and then expansions that completely break this.
They certainly will, but - in the future - with their foot already in the door and people using it, the developers will just patch in response and get it to work again. This has happened time and time again in other games and it's almost never the case that patching stops the private servers. People can after all just play the old version if need be.
Yet patching is slower and lags behind the real release. WoW/Lineage 2 private servers were like that for ages. Wanna play for free? Then take what you can get and watch paying customers have access to the patches/content way before you do. Kinda sucks in a game where balance changes and expansions will affect playstyles alot.
... It's not about playing for free. At least not for me. This is a good thing, I want to have more choices rather than less, all the ways Blizzard fucked up BattleNet 2.0 can be fixed through this. Many many people have already explained how BNet2.0 is a step backwards with a TON of features missing, so I don't think I have to reiterate, but for chrissakes, we still have Delta Quadrant in the map-pool.
To me it's not a good thing as we might not see all expansions nor the promised improvements if this grows. I really don't understand people who think that a pirated client is somehow going to save the game.
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
Direct connections also brings up the problem of the player running the server having no latency....
2) Yes it's possible and I already explained why I would use a private server over this one.
How is it possible to have matchmaking without a centralised server
You're right, the example was bad, yet the point still stands. We had global servers in BW, there's absolutely no reason why we can't enjoy lagless cross-continental play in Starcraft 2. Oh wait, there is, it's called Blizzard's/Activision's greed.
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
I think the majority of people here are arguing a very moot point, lawsuits. This is in China. China. They can probably pay an official to hold off a lawsuit until the rapture (and i mean a lot longer than 2012)
To sue in China is not the same as to sue in America. It's not easy, and it has a ton of underhanded and shady dealings going on. Lets not forget how truly corrupt China really is. Blizzard will have one hell of a time trying to get this thing "shut down".
The best thing they could do right now in my opinion would be to at the very least, give major tournaments LAN, if not outright, enable it in the game. I'll bet my left pinky finger, that the game has viable and working LAN, but its not in the released versions for whatever reason. (Greed/Piracy)
We'll have to wait and see how good this "crack" is first of all, and then we'll have to wait and see what Blizzard does about it. Right now nobody can really say one way or the other.
On July 05 2011 03:44 RoyalCheese wrote: Will be C&D-ed soon enough. And rightfully so.
Yeah there will be probably some lawsuits and the like as this grows more popular (if it even does), but that won't stop it at that point, and is just used to deter people from hosting servers / distributing the server software in certain legislatures like the US and Europe.
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
I can understand private servers for subscription based games like WoW where people want to avoid paying for the service, but when you have a free public server that Blizz provides, this makes no sense to me.
No tournament can use this legally, and using it for private practice (say, within a team house) because it gets rid of the built in latency (if it even does that) would be terrible preparation for actual tournaments that use the public server which has the latency. Patches and expansions on on other games usually put private servers a month behind (and often times more), especially on blizz products where the server must check for client versions or else the differing object models will always result in desync problems. That is, you'd have to play on the old client version which, again, is useless in a game that's all about current competition.
Blizz is very active about shutting down unapproved private servers for their other games, especially those from which they're currently making money. When HotS comes out and if they ever add the map marketplace, I have no doubt C&D letters will be sent out much faster than to the groups that broke the sc2 beta server handshakes.
Hosting, emulating and even connecting to another matching-making service is not allowed under 2.f and 2.g of sc2's EULA.
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
On July 05 2011 01:53 Kishuu wrote: As much as I would love lan, am I the only one who thinks this is bad? I mean, if you wanna play this game professionally and "help e-sports" you are gonna buy it. The kids that are gonna crack it with LAN support are that leechy garena kids who are gonna pirate and hack all day long for two months, then forget about it. On the cool side, some of my friends that can't buy the game will play now, but for how long? I want more regulars that wanna learn the game for real.
buying this game just gives blizz $. $ that they already have, money that they dont spend to make esports better . WE, THE PLAYERS are the only thing esports has. we support it not Blizz.
but i do agree, pirating the game overall is bad. realistically, if people liek SC2, $65 for the game is reasonable due to how much play time you get out of it.
You do realize that Blizzard sponsors tournaments all the time and spend alot time and money on developing the game after initial release? Some people on these forums...
Blizzard also takes royalties from certain large tournaments no?
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
a) All connections do that. It's how the internet works. b) Blizzard doesn't control that path. c) connecting to a suburb in Seoul would take an almost identical route to connecting to a farm in Seoul.
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
surely you are joking? the power of the server means nothing for latency. it just allows for more load. more users. when your talking about 4 players max you can be hosting it on a 486 and it'll be fine.
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
YES its better to have 1 server hosting 1 game than 1 servercluster hosting 1 million games....
this thread starts to get offtopic into basic network architecture....
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
a) All connections do that. It's how the internet works. b) Blizzard doesn't control that path. c) connecting to a suburb in Seoul would take an almost identical route to connecting to a farm in Seoul.
currently player A > battle.net server > player b
lan mode/direct connection
player A > player B
think of direct as a straight line, whereas first point is a triangle. yes i realise the internet doesn't work "as the crow flies" but an extra connection means more hops. which increases latency. THATS how the internet works
the sad thing about it is thats its only made to play the game without paying for it. The only thing it will achieve is that blizzard will probably not recruit some extra programmers since a bit of income is missing, in other words everyone supporting this thing will delay the diablo 3 release for a whole day! and for every month of delayance the game will be 1 dollar more expensiv. Or it will be split in 3 parts !!!!
Oh right and it won't help with anything at all. Well for the one thinking that there will be lan support if all games are relased... people are still buying WoL after 1 year just to smurf... don't think they will add lan support after all expansions are out. And for tournaments only ? why ... they players will be totally screwed up in those tournaments with their timings as they are probably done to early. So they would need the lan system in their houses as well.
Just give up on that shitty lan and work on increasing the connections globally
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
Thats not how internet works.
What he means is that instead of going Computer->Battlenet->Computer, it goes Computer<->Computer directly.
This kind of setup would only really benefit real LANs(ie. MLG) not pseudo-LANs(Garena, Hamachi).
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
a) All connections do that. It's how the internet works. b) Blizzard doesn't control that path. c) connecting to a suburb in Seoul would take an almost identical route to connecting to a farm in Seoul.
currently player A > battle.net server > player b
lan mode/direct connection
player A > player B
think of direct as a straight line, whereas first point is a triangle. yes i realise the internet doesn't work "as the crow flies" but an extra connection means more hops. which increases latency. THATS how the internet works
Ok, if you mean that two guys want to play against each other and against each other only, then you are correct. Sorry about my previous post
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
a) All connections do that. It's how the internet works. b) Blizzard doesn't control that path. c) connecting to a suburb in Seoul would take an almost identical route to connecting to a farm in Seoul.
currently player A > battle.net server > player b
lan mode/direct connection
player A > player B
think of direct as a straight line, whereas first point is a triangle.
bnet server -> player b consists of a few miles in Seoul. It's not gonna make a difference. A few hops around ISPs in Seoul isn't gonna add any amount of latency any human is going to notice!
*using the Ukrainian/Korean example from before. I guess it could matter if you're out in the boondocks in the US or something.
On July 05 2011 03:44 RoyalCheese wrote: Will be C&D-ed soon enough. And rightfully so.
Yes because China is really one of those contries which takes software piracy serious.
More realistic, one can hope that stuff like this will put some more pressure on blizzard, but i doubt that something they haven't thought of yet will come out. though they might shift resources, official tournament server like riot gaming is making before HoTS maybe?
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
a) All connections do that. It's how the internet works. b) Blizzard doesn't control that path. c) connecting to a suburb in Seoul would take an almost identical route to connecting to a farm in Seoul.
currently player A > battle.net server > player b
lan mode/direct connection
player A > player B
think of direct as a straight line, whereas first point is a triangle.
bnet server -> player b consists of a few miles in Seoul. It's not gonna make a difference.
how fortunate for the guy living a few miles from seoul! how blessed he must be otherwise pointless post.
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
a) All connections do that. It's how the internet works. b) Blizzard doesn't control that path. c) connecting to a suburb in Seoul would take an almost identical route to connecting to a farm in Seoul.
currently player A > battle.net server > player b
lan mode/direct connection
player A > player B
think of direct as a straight line, whereas first point is a triangle.
bnet server -> player b consists of a few miles in Seoul. It's not gonna make a difference. A few hops around ISPs in Seoul isn't gonna add any amount of latency any human is going to notice!
That is all fine in theory.
In reality though Bnet2 latency is unplayable between EU and Kor. Certainly way worse than any direct connection. So you can argue theory all day, in reality it will be better with a direct connection, as shown by any other game that allows that.
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
a) All connections do that. It's how the internet works. b) Blizzard doesn't control that path. c) connecting to a suburb in Seoul would take an almost identical route to connecting to a farm in Seoul.
currently player A > battle.net server > player b
lan mode/direct connection
player A > player B
think of direct as a straight line, whereas first point is a triangle.
bnet server -> player b consists of a few miles in Seoul. It's not gonna make a difference. A few hops around ISPs in Seoul isn't gonna add any amount of latency any human is going to notice!
You've got zatic who has played BW on iCCup for years and he's telling you that the direct connection is playable but the one over BNet servers isn't, who are you to tell us that the added amount of latency isn't noticable? Just accept the fact that people here have actual experience in these matters compared to your useless theorycrafting.
On July 05 2011 03:34 Yaotzin wrote: [quote] Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho. [quote] Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
a) All connections do that. It's how the internet works. b) Blizzard doesn't control that path. c) connecting to a suburb in Seoul would take an almost identical route to connecting to a farm in Seoul.
currently player A > battle.net server > player b
lan mode/direct connection
player A > player B
think of direct as a straight line, whereas first point is a triangle.
bnet server -> player b consists of a few miles in Seoul. It's not gonna make a difference. A few hops around ISPs in Seoul isn't gonna add any amount of latency any human is going to notice!
That is all fine in theory.
In reality though Bnet2 latency is unplayable between EU and Kor. Certainly way worse than any direct connection. So you can argue theory all day, in reality it will be better with a direct connection, as shown by any other game that allows that.
Well the thing is that you have no idea what latency is through "direct connect". You only have examples of broodwar which may or may not apply in SC2. Afaik BW didn't have built in latency, the protocol was different etc. You can't just say that "it worked for broodwar therefore it has to work for sc2"
On July 05 2011 03:34 Yaotzin wrote: [quote] Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
I mentioned the scenario anywho. [quote] Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
a) All connections do that. It's how the internet works. b) Blizzard doesn't control that path. c) connecting to a suburb in Seoul would take an almost identical route to connecting to a farm in Seoul.
currently player A > battle.net server > player b
lan mode/direct connection
player A > player B
think of direct as a straight line, whereas first point is a triangle.
bnet server -> player b consists of a few miles in Seoul. It's not gonna make a difference. A few hops around ISPs in Seoul isn't gonna add any amount of latency any human is going to notice!
That is all fine in theory.
In reality though Bnet2 latency is unplayable between EU and Kor. Certainly way worse than any direct connection.
The only difference between this and Bnet2 is that Bnet2 is now hosted on someone else's computer.
So you can argue theory all day, in reality it will be better with a direct connection, as shown by any other game that allows that.
So please stop arguing.
Stop saying stuff based on assumptions because of what happens in a different game.
It's basic networking that would work in SC2, but they didn't implement it because they went with the big brother netcode of central servers and disconnected regions that ostensibly rakes in more cash. Edit: This isn't a subject like judging SC2 balance based off BW balance. You can find competent netcode in thousands of games, most of which came from studios smaller than Blizzard. BW is just the example closest to heart.
1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players.
A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
a) All connections do that. It's how the internet works. b) Blizzard doesn't control that path. c) connecting to a suburb in Seoul would take an almost identical route to connecting to a farm in Seoul.
currently player A > battle.net server > player b
lan mode/direct connection
player A > player B
think of direct as a straight line, whereas first point is a triangle.
bnet server -> player b consists of a few miles in Seoul. It's not gonna make a difference. A few hops around ISPs in Seoul isn't gonna add any amount of latency any human is going to notice!
That is all fine in theory.
In reality though Bnet2 latency is unplayable between EU and Kor. Certainly way worse than any direct connection. So you can argue theory all day, in reality it will be better with a direct connection, as shown by any other game that allows that.
Well the thing is that you have no idea what latency is through "direct connect". You only have examples of broodwar which may or may not apply in SC2. Afaik BW didn't have built in latency, the protocol was different etc. You can't just say that "it worked for broodwar therefore it has to work for sc2"
What I can say though is that it's going to be better than through Bnet2. Also there is no reason why the protocol of Bnet2 would magically work EU <> NA but not EU <> Kor.
All that network stuff aside, I wonder how so many people seem so sure this will prevail? There is a hacked version of the current client now, that will not work when the next patch hits, then gets hacked again, hack break with next patch, rinse/repeat. As much as I would like a LAN option, piracy can't be the correct solution.
On July 05 2011 04:12 oBlade wrote: It's basic networking that would work in SC2, but they didn't implement it because they went with the big brother netcode of central servers and disconnected regions that ostensibly rakes in more cash. Edit: This isn't a subject like judging SC2 balance based off BW balance. You can find competent netcode in thousands of games, most of which came from studios smaller than Blizzard. BW is just the example closest to heart.
Point is this crack doesn't change the code, it just hosts the server on your PC instead. How would that improve matters for anyone except the guy hosting it?
On July 05 2011 03:40 Yaotzin wrote: [quote] A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
a) All connections do that. It's how the internet works. b) Blizzard doesn't control that path. c) connecting to a suburb in Seoul would take an almost identical route to connecting to a farm in Seoul.
currently player A > battle.net server > player b
lan mode/direct connection
player A > player B
think of direct as a straight line, whereas first point is a triangle.
bnet server -> player b consists of a few miles in Seoul. It's not gonna make a difference. A few hops around ISPs in Seoul isn't gonna add any amount of latency any human is going to notice!
That is all fine in theory.
In reality though Bnet2 latency is unplayable between EU and Kor. Certainly way worse than any direct connection. So you can argue theory all day, in reality it will be better with a direct connection, as shown by any other game that allows that.
Well the thing is that you have no idea what latency is through "direct connect". You only have examples of broodwar which may or may not apply in SC2. Afaik BW didn't have built in latency, the protocol was different etc. You can't just say that "it worked for broodwar therefore it has to work for sc2"
What I can say though is that it's going to be better than through Bnet2. Also there is no reason why the protocol of Bnet2 would magically work EU <> NA but not EU <> Kor.
Exactly, oBlade, thanks.
Well riddle me this, then. Why would it work from eu to na but not from eu to korea? Is it blizzard disturbing it somehow (why would it then work between eu and na), is it their incompetence, is it that the seoul datacenters suck or is it just the way the infrastructure is? I'm not trying to be an asshole, it really doesn't make sense to me.
Because if it's anything but blizzard blocking it or seoul datacenters, the private server won't fix it.
On July 05 2011 04:04 TedJustice wrote: If this exists, then the game can be pirated now.
That means there's no reason for them not to give us an official LAN, since the current setup isn't saving them from piracy at all.
This was my first thought as well, I wouldn't be surprised if Blizz just ignores it but now official LAN from them should happen and now I just have to hope that it will.
Something like this was bound to happen at some point, I do not see it changing much though, as many have stated above no tournaments are going to use it because blizzard would take action. There will likely be a small sub-set of people who use it just because they don't want to buy the actual game.
Now if only blizzard would have given a LanPC (More like a portal server) to bigger events like MLG/Dreamhack/GSL instead of some hackers making it available that will get hardly any use.
Anyone who's used listchecker in WC3 can tell you that there's drastic improvements in latency from bypassing the Bnet servers. If this was also true for BW then I don't see why it wouldn't be for SC2, unless some of our resident networking experts can provide a counter argument based on something other than "It doesn't make sense".
OK I don't know how I can explain this. Maybe with these completely imaginary numbers (which shouldn't be too far off):
BroodWar (P2P): NA <> EU 100ms Kor <> EU 150ms
Any other game (P2P): NA <> EU 100ms Kor <> EU 150ms
Starcraft2 (Through Bnet2): NA <> EU 100ms Kor <> EU 2000ms
Are you seriously suggesting there is something build into the Bnet2 protocol that somehow detects it's connecting Kor <> EU and introduces unplayble latency just for the fuck of it?
The only reason for the incredible high delay in Kor <> EU can be the routing of all game traffic through the Bnet servers. I don't know WHY that is set up so bad, but it's just observable fact. And getting rid of that will improve latency. And again, there is no reason why the Bnet2 protocol should magically behave differently than any other gaming protocol, and on top of that only between Kor and EU.
If you are still convinced a direct connection will not improve latency between EU and Kor than lets just wait until someone tests it OK? No point to further discuss this.
On July 05 2011 04:30 zatic wrote: The only reason for the incredible high delay in Kor <> EU can be the routing of all game traffic through the Bnet servers. I don't know WHY that is set up so bad, but it's just observable fact.
Yes clearly Blizzard screwed the pooch somewhere.
And getting rid of that will improve latency.
This is the point of contention. How does this crack get rid of it? You're just hosting Bnet now instead of connecting to the Blizzard server hosting it. Good for the dude hosting it, but how does it help the guy in Europe or w/e? It should have exactly the same problems as Blizzard's Bnet.
And again, there is no reason why the Bnet2 protocol should magically behave differently than any other gaming protocol, and on top of that only between Kor and EU.
But alas, it does.
If you are still convinced a direct connection will not improve latency between EU and Kor than lets just wait until someone tests it OK? No point to further discuss this.
It's not a direct connection. SC2 simply doesn't have the capability to connect directly.
Alright since you just can't accept how things are let's just wait until someone tests it. There is really no point in discussing this any further, and it's starting to derail the topic.
I'm shocked it took an entire year for a group to actually reverse engineer the netcode and build a server from the ground up. I dont think blizzard is going to like this at all, WC3 and BW in china were mostly pirated and played on p2p clients with custom lobbies etc. With this private realm now out the playerbase in China wont be buying SC2 and the expansions. Kind of a tragedy but as I said i'm surprised it took this long. I hope Blizzard makes the correct decisions in the near future, because if this becomes mainstream what's really stopping them from releasing lan.
I play on NA from latin america and having around 350 to 500 milliseconds is standard. I can't even imagine the pleasure of playing at somewhere close to 150, let alone 50!!!
I wonder if i would go up in the ladder if i could. Micro would be so much better.
On July 05 2011 04:29 Baiyan wrote: Anyone who's used listchecker in WC3 can tell you that there's drastic improvements in latency from bypassing the Bnet servers. If this was also true for BW then I don't see why it wouldn't be for SC2, unless some of our resident networking experts can provide a counter argument based on something other than "It doesn't make sense".
This is only half true. Warcraft was programmed to use a different communication interval when played on lan or on bnet. Basically, on bnet it sent data four or five times a second, meaning you have an auto lag of at least 200ms. On lan mode this number increased to somewhere around 10 or 20 times a second, cutting this lag 100ms to 50ms. Listchecker exploited this fact, by hosting internet games through the lan interface, so the data submission rate was simply much higher.
Of course, not having to run through a dedicated server but being able to communicate directly does improve latency too. but the major factor here stems from warcraft 3 being so old, that it was originally developed to work with dial-up connections, that just could not handle the data rate used in lan mode. This is why all these listchecker, ggclient, ghostbot hosting platforms popped up. They all exploit the same thing, each with some other random improvements. But they all are a huge chunk faster than bnet, simply because of the higher data transmission rate. Funny tech gimmics only contribute a small share to that speed-up.
On July 05 2011 04:36 zatic wrote: Alright since you just can't accept how things are let's just wait until someone tests it. There is really no point in discussing this any further, and it's starting to derail the topic.
Your wholly unjustified arrogance is tiresome so I agree. Generally when you say something and someone disagrees you try back it up, not cry how the other person can't accept how right you are.
On July 05 2011 03:52 zatic wrote: [quote] This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
a) All connections do that. It's how the internet works. b) Blizzard doesn't control that path. c) connecting to a suburb in Seoul would take an almost identical route to connecting to a farm in Seoul.
currently player A > battle.net server > player b
lan mode/direct connection
player A > player B
think of direct as a straight line, whereas first point is a triangle.
bnet server -> player b consists of a few miles in Seoul. It's not gonna make a difference. A few hops around ISPs in Seoul isn't gonna add any amount of latency any human is going to notice!
That is all fine in theory.
In reality though Bnet2 latency is unplayable between EU and Kor. Certainly way worse than any direct connection. So you can argue theory all day, in reality it will be better with a direct connection, as shown by any other game that allows that.
Well the thing is that you have no idea what latency is through "direct connect". You only have examples of broodwar which may or may not apply in SC2. Afaik BW didn't have built in latency, the protocol was different etc. You can't just say that "it worked for broodwar therefore it has to work for sc2"
What I can say though is that it's going to be better than through Bnet2. Also there is no reason why the protocol of Bnet2 would magically work EU <> NA but not EU <> Kor.
Exactly, oBlade, thanks.
Well riddle me this, then. Why would it work from eu to na but not from eu to korea? Is it blizzard disturbing it somehow (why would it then work between eu and na), is it their incompetence, is it that the seoul datacenters suck or is it just the way the infrastructure is? I'm not trying to be an asshole, it really doesn't make sense to me.
Because if it's anything but blizzard blocking it or seoul datacenters, the private server won't fix it.
I know its not the point you wanted to make, but maybe blizzard IS increasing lag a bit because some algorithm has to check constantly if both clients are genuine. This and the "direct connection" could maybe improve lag to a playable amount. (according to speedtest.net i have 330 ms ping to the speedtest-seoul-servers)
On July 05 2011 04:30 zatic wrote: OK I don't know how I can explain this. Maybe with these completely imaginary numbers (which shouldn't be too far off):
BroodWar (P2P): NA <> EU 100ms Kor <> EU 150ms
Starcraft2 (Through Bnet2): NA <> EU 100ms Kor <> EU 2000ms
Are you seriously suggesting there is something build into the Bnet2 protocol that somehow detects it's connecting Kor <> EU and introduces unplayble latency just for the fuck of it? ...
Not into the protocol, but they have probably a priorisation in place that ruins the connection. It is not necessarily even there to ruin the connection Kor<>EU, but in Blizzard segmentation of battle.net it is simply not regarded as necessary to be able to play between Kor and EU, so I doubt it will be fixed by Blizzard.
It may well be, that the crack could remove that problem, but I think many people have too high hopes of that working for a longer period of time. I also doubt it will be any good to the scene to have a "secret pro-net" and an open battle.net. Segementation is never good, be it imposed by Blizzard or by hacks.
On July 05 2011 04:29 Baiyan wrote: Anyone who's used listchecker in WC3 can tell you that there's drastic improvements in latency from bypassing the Bnet servers. If this was also true for BW then I don't see why it wouldn't be for SC2, unless some of our resident networking experts can provide a counter argument based on something other than "It doesn't make sense".
This. There's a reason these third party hosting services became so popular. Taking bnet servers out of the equation improves latency significantly.
On July 05 2011 04:29 Baiyan wrote: Anyone who's used listchecker in WC3 can tell you that there's drastic improvements in latency from bypassing the Bnet servers. If this was also true for BW then I don't see why it wouldn't be for SC2, unless some of our resident networking experts can provide a counter argument based on something other than "It doesn't make sense".
This. There's a reason these third party hosting services became so popular. Taking bnet servers out of the equation improves latency significantly.
They changed that set up in sc2, so theres no point in bitching
If you ACTUALLY played wc3 ladder and compared it to sc2 ladder, you would see a vast difference.
Lan being available is going toto make tournament organizers pretty frustrated with Blizzard. The tournament organizers get a lot of criticism from things like lag an disconnects. Now they babes way of completely getting rid of that, but blizadd isn't going to let them use it. Blizzard also probably tells tournament organizers stuff like "its not possible", so some guys doing this on their own free time really hurts Blizzard's credibility. How are tournament organizers going to feel about their reputation being damaged, when it could have been prevented by having lan functionality? Especially when the functionality exists, but Blizzard won't let them use it.
Tournament organizers such as gsl, mlg, dreamhack etc have a lot to gain from lan functionality. I get a strong feelings that hey will be trying to reason with Blizzard to get lan functionality now that this is a working product.
This is very good news for us as viewers. Potentially.
On July 05 2011 04:36 zatic wrote: Alright since you just can't accept how things are let's just wait until someone tests it. There is really no point in discussing this any further, and it's starting to derail the topic.
Your wholly unjustified arrogance is tiresome so I agree. Generally when you say something and someone disagrees you try back it up, not cry how the other person can't accept how right you are.
On July 05 2011 04:29 Baiyan wrote: Anyone who's used listchecker in WC3 can tell you that there's drastic improvements in latency from bypassing the Bnet servers. If this was also true for BW then I don't see why it wouldn't be for SC2, unless some of our resident networking experts can provide a counter argument based on something other than "It doesn't make sense".
This. There's a reason these third party hosting services became so popular. Taking bnet servers out of the equation improves latency significantly.
Well as someone else said with War3 (and BW) it was different in that a different protocol was used for Bnet and (actual) LAN. What these tools did is enable the LAN protocol for Bnet. The actual gaming was direct between players though in both cases.
With SC2 things are different. Currently all game traffic is routed through Bnet2 servers, and the crack will potentially eliminate this extra tour the game traffic takes through the intertubes.
On July 05 2011 04:36 zatic wrote: Alright since you just can't accept how things are let's just wait until someone tests it. There is really no point in discussing this any further, and it's starting to derail the topic.
Your wholly unjustified arrogance is tiresome so I agree. Generally when you say something and someone disagrees you try back it up, not cry how the other person can't accept how right you are.
you are some random guy whos arguing with people who have years of experience and knowledge, the only person whos arrogant in here is you
On July 05 2011 04:51 zatic wrote: With SC2 things are different. Currently all game traffic is routed through Bnet2 servers, and the crack will potentially eliminate this extra tour the game traffic takes through the intertubes.
Please fix the thread, this is not a LAN crack, it in no way allowed direct client to client connection, this is a battle.net emulator that intercepts and reroutes starcraft 2 traffic.
On July 05 2011 05:11 Silent331 wrote: Please fix the thread, this is not a LAN crack, it in no way allowed direct client to client connection, this is a battle.net emulator that intercepts and reroutes starcraft 2 traffic.
While I'm pretty sure Blizzard will try to take actions ( idiots), in some country the law will not recognize their right as long as people dont use it in an bad way ( making money ressling, etc). I know in some countries when you buy something, you can do whatever the hell you want with it as long as it can be considered legitimate. This hack does look like it....
On July 05 2011 05:13 Morrisson wrote: While I'm pretty sure Blizzard will try to take actions ( idiots), in some country the law will not recognize their right as long as people dont use it in an bad way ( making money ressling, etc). I know in some countries when you buy something, you can do whatever the hell you want with it as long as it can be considered legitimate. This hack does look like it....
If Blizzard had the ability to eliminate 3rd party servers, there wouldn't be WoW private servers with thousands of players which run for a long time. I really don't see what would make people think that Blizzard would have more power or more motivation to kill SC2 private servers when WoW makes them so much more money.
I see no benefit to a private server over battle.net at this point in time. If battle.net turns into a hack fest permanently then maybe, but not before.
On July 05 2011 05:16 Egyptian_Head wrote: I see no benefit to a private server over battle.net at this point in time. If battle.net turns into a hack fest permanently then maybe, but not before.
i'm sure if they add a true ladder instead of what bnet 2.0 is now then it will be better
It's a bit unclear anyway. According to the OP, since you can run it on your "local PC," it should imitate direct connect? It doesn't look like anyone tested it yet. We'll have to wait for the verdict from R1CH.
Lets all hope some russian dude hiding in the forest behind 20 proxies starts a private server. Would be so much more fun to play and practice @ ladder on all cup/tournament maps ^^.
A bnet server emu would still be useful for WAN use to create an ICCup type ladder. If there is some code in the client+server that is forcing an increase in packet latency. This can be patched on client end if it's found or exists and easily fixed on server end.
and obviously it would be very useful for LAN use too.
On July 05 2011 05:20 oBlade wrote: It's a bit unclear anyway. According to the OP, since you can run it on your "local PC," it should imitate direct connect? It doesn't look like anyone tested it yet. We'll have to wait for the verdict from R1CH.
Direct connection between player PC and player PC: Yes. Direct connection between SC2 game client and SC2 game client: No.
There is still a custom Bnet2 server, running on one of the player's PC where the game traffic is routed through.
On July 05 2011 05:20 oBlade wrote: It's a bit unclear anyway. According to the OP, since you can run it on your "local PC," it should imitate direct connect? It doesn't look like anyone tested it yet. We'll have to wait for the verdict from R1CH.
Direct connection between player PC and player PC: Yes. Direct connection between SC2 game client and SC2 game client: No.
There is still a custom Bnet2 server, running on one of the player's PC where the game traffic is routed through.
Yup, with this method if you wanted direct Player 1<->Player 2, either Player 1 or Player 2 would have to host the server emu and essentially that's a direction connection.
On July 05 2011 05:20 oBlade wrote: It's a bit unclear anyway. According to the OP, since you can run it on your "local PC," it should imitate direct connect? It doesn't look like anyone tested it yet. We'll have to wait for the verdict from R1CH.
Direct connection between player PC and player PC: Yes. Direct connection between SC2 game client and SC2 game client: No.
There is still a custom Bnet2 server, running on one of the player's PC where the game traffic is routed through.
Well its no direct client to client LAN, but you still should be able to get LAN latency/stability if you host it on a PC connected to your your LAN.
everyone said it would come, blizzard said once they'd fixed the security issue, they'd release LAN. Now this is out and there's literally NOTHING blizzard can do to stop piracy, i wonder if they'll finaly release LAN now that it wont make any security difference whatsoever.
On July 05 2011 05:16 Egyptian_Head wrote: I see no benefit to a private server over battle.net at this point in time. If battle.net turns into a hack fest permanently then maybe, but not before.
It already has. The mainstream public maphack has complete anti-warden coverage, huge feature set, undetectable from replays. It is in fact so good at hiding itself, that is why it isnt talked about much. And this is the chance for private servers to actually fix things and punish maphackers that go rampart on the real battle net.
It would be interesting to see how Blizz reacts to this, if they do react at all. Perhaps this won't have an affect on anything, who knows. Depends on the quality of the server emulator.
On July 05 2011 05:16 Egyptian_Head wrote: I see no benefit to a private server over battle.net at this point in time. If battle.net turns into a hack fest permanently then maybe, but not before.
It already has. The mainstream public maphack has complete anti-warden coverage, huge feature set, undetectable from replays. It is in fact so good at hiding itself, that is why it isnt talked about much. And this is the chance for private servers to actually fix things and punish maphackers that go rampart on the real battle net.
pretty much this.
Even disregarding actual game injecting hacks, there are external hacks that simply read sc2 memory and display everything as an overlay.. just like has been made for so many other games for the last 10-12 years.
Online tournaments really shouldn't involve ANY money at all, if its not done at lan don't treat it as legit, its not fun to witch hunt people, but it's proven over and over again that many many players, including pro's are willing to cheat, exploit.. hell even break laws.. to get ahead in competition.
On July 05 2011 05:56 Robooto wrote: It still boggles my mind that blizzard made a tournament server for WoW competitions, but for SC2 battle.net 2.0 is suppose to suffice.
That could be part of the reason they didn't, the wow tournament server was leaked, hacked and turned into private community arena servers.
Not sure why you guys are so suprised about it... we had 2 group that cracked B.net2 during beta... blizzard sued both of them and we never saw an official release...
On July 05 2011 05:56 Robooto wrote: It still boggles my mind that blizzard made a tournament server for WoW competitions, but for SC2 battle.net 2.0 is suppose to suffice.
That's becquse theyd need to all shave their characters on one server and have th same items, don't even compare it
On July 05 2011 05:56 Robooto wrote: It still boggles my mind that blizzard made a tournament server for WoW competitions, but for SC2 battle.net 2.0 is suppose to suffice.
That could be part of the reason they didn't, the wow tournament server was leaked, hacked and turned into private community arena servers.
definitely good reason to not have lan in main esports title, jk ofc <3 Blizzard
So the site that links the download also links a virus scan site that reports the file has a virus.. I kind of suspected that.. It may still work but if your testing it, be careful.
On July 05 2011 00:41 Morrisson wrote: MOD EDIT: Can't have links to this, sorry.
This is not "LAN mode". It is a crack that runs SC2 through a custom Bnet server which you can run on your local PC. This means instead of connecting and routing all game traffic through official Bnet servers, you connect to a local, custom server on your (or your opponent's) PC and route traffic through that. It is more comparable to bnetd/Iccup than LAN.
This is strictly against Blizzard ToS and as such we cannot have any links or other forms of advertising (guides how to install / run it etc) on TL. Thanks.
Cowardly, IMO. Even if it is against the Blizzard ToS, that ToS does not have the force of law; it is a contract between private parties not binding on anyone other than people who have signed it. It is specifically legal to do these sorts of things if you have not signed the ToS, and it is legal to discuss doing them even if you have. I'm looking through the bnet2 ToS, and there is nothing to stop people who have agreed to them from discussing third-party servers, even if they aren't permitted to use them themselves.
The DMCA contains a specific exception for reverse engineering for the purposes of interoperability (which this pretty clearly is), so it seems that there is no criminal law that bans the development and the discussion of third-party servers.
EDIT: Yes, I'm claiming that the 2005 appellate court decision in the bnetd case was bad law, which it pretty clearly is. Of course, that precedent doesn't apply to simply linking, unless some other judge gets a bribe to say that it does.
Just because Blizzard would prefer not to have this information out in the open doesn't legally obligate TL to ban posting of these links. If TL would prefer for these links to not be posted on their forum (because of some desire to not offend Blizzard) that's of course their business, but it's a little deceptive for Chill to imply that the Blizzard ToS requires them to ban the links -- it doesn't.
That said, this is excellent news, for two reasons:
1) if this becomes widespread then it'll be more likely Blizzard will actually authorize lan play, since the cat will already be out of the bag;
2) The third-party server may have features (observers don't cause lag, reconnect after disconnect, better netcode, or whatever) that the official one doesn't. This will put pressure on Blizzard to implement similar features (that really should have been around since release).
Hopefully we'll see legal/technical developments that allow LAN tournaments to be played in some jurisdiction using the hacked server without fear of reprisals, either because of legal protection or technical impracticality of sending lawyers after the competitors.
I don't know what exactly your problem is. You are allowed to discuss this on TL, I mean look at the past 10 pages of this very thread. You just can't advertise the actual crack. And that is a TL decision. I can reword the part in the OP though.
On July 05 2011 05:56 Irrelevant wrote: There was something like this during beta, but it kept getting shut down, this will probably follow the same fate.
actually there wasn't. during beta no1 was ever able to recreate a battle.net, there was no possiblity of multiplayer. the best we had in beta was playing vs scripted AI's
It been out for almost half a year. But the crack needed to be revised for update everytime Blizzard made a new patch. So it's not popular. Also the crack is not user friendly, so not many ppl willing to use it for regular game.
On July 05 2011 06:31 temps wrote: So the site that links the download also links a virus scan site that reports the file has a virus.. I kind of suspected that.. It may still work but if your testing it, be careful.
Virus scanners react to certain types of coding even if the files are complete hamless. I doubt there's a actual virus embedded, but I could be wrong, of course.
I'm a bit confused. This whole thread is based on the same thing that had another thread dedicated to it months ago and absolutely nothing came of it. People swore up and down that it'd force LAN or some LAN type client would become popular but it never moved beyond that. It doesn't even seem like theres been much progress since then because the same father/mother crap is still the issue and apparently it still only works on the chinese client. It just seems like a repeat of the now closed thread with little to no new progress whatsoever, only the required files being hosted on a new english website.
Also the latest from the site in question:
But with Heaorn we have tested something else.
LAN on internet. We have used "Tunngle beta" and that's works !!
But Battle net > LAN on internet
There some mini lag...
So I guess that puts the argument of whether it's better to rest unless someone else comes up with better results.
Please excuse my ignorance, but can someone please explain why Blizzard was okay with Iccup existing but are absolutely zero tolerance with SC2. When did / what were the reasons for this shift in policy, I know the main reason is to root out piracy, but what made it okay for private servers to exist in BW and not SC2, I have never fully understood this.
We really have to get Blizzard to give up this fight, somehow. We need this. It's a crack because it's like fucking crack. Except with none of the bad consequences ._.
And hey, since we're all buds now, why not release something official? It's already out there, might as well make it official and maybe Blizzard can get some more control/money back in their hands -that- way. Since that's what they're after. Just release a limited version of THEIR bnetd for a reasonable price to LANs so that they can host their own servers in a totally legit way.
This is not unreasonable is it?
People would prefer to host legit servers at their official events over anything else, I imagine.
On July 05 2011 07:57 oBlade wrote: Like splitting the community into a Korean, European, and NA community?
no, like making sub communities within those regions. Making it much harder for ppl who pick up the game to find high level players/see high level play. because they're not in the "community"
On July 05 2011 07:49 Rasun wrote: Please excuse my ignorance, but can someone please explain why Blizzard was okay with Iccup existing but are absolutely zero tolerance with SC2. When did / what were the reasons for this shift in policy, I know the main reason is to root out piracy, but what made it okay for private servers to exist in BW and not SC2, I have never fully understood this.
Iccup was doing something for a 'dead' game. They ofcourse knew of the limitations of their own servers and wanted to keep the community allive for sc2. I doubt there were a big fan of the downloadable version but either way most people on Iccup had at one point bought sc1.
On July 05 2011 07:57 oBlade wrote: Like splitting the community into a Korean, European, and NA community?
no, like making sub communities within those regions. Making it much harder for ppl who pick up the game to find high level players/see high level play. because they're not in the "community"
Oh, okay, I understand. Like fracturing a global community into subcommunities. There is nothing good about Blizzard having a monopoly on ladders to their own game. E-sports is ground-up, not top-down. Games grow when third parties swarm to do stuff for them.
On July 05 2011 07:57 oBlade wrote: Like splitting the community into a Korean, European, and NA community?
no, like making sub communities within those regions. Making it much harder for ppl who pick up the game to find high level players/see high level play. because they're not in the "community"
Oh, okay, I understand. Like fracturing a global community into subcommunities. There is nothing good about Blizzard having a monopoly on ladders to their own game. E-sports is ground-up, not top-down. Games grow when third parties swarm to do stuff for them.
What monopoly? They're doing fine. This isn't BW days where BNET was utter shit. there is a Great ladder system in place along with solid Matchmaking. There is no need for a private server.
On July 05 2011 08:08 VPCursed wrote: What monopoly? They're doing fine. This isn't BW days where BNET was utter shit. there is a Great ladder system in place along with solid Matchmaking. There is no need for a private server.
On July 05 2011 07:57 oBlade wrote: Like splitting the community into a Korean, European, and NA community?
no, like making sub communities within those regions. Making it much harder for ppl who pick up the game to find high level players/see high level play. because they're not in the "community"
Oh, okay, I understand. Like fracturing a global community into subcommunities. There is nothing good about Blizzard having a monopoly on ladders to their own game. E-sports is ground-up, not top-down. Games grow when third parties swarm to do stuff for them.
What monopoly? They're doing fine. This isn't BW days where BNET was utter shit. there is a Great ladder system in place along with solid Matchmaking. There is no need for a private server.
Monopoly means there is no alternative. This is in principle not good for us. And that's debatable: the list of things Battle.net 2.0 is missing is longer than Canata vs Shine.
On July 05 2011 00:43 echO [W] wrote: They're going to get sued and shut down.
There's no way this will be used in any sort of mainstream/productive manner, given how involved Blizzard is with all the major SC2 tournaments and lans.
The only way I can see LAN in SC2 is if Blizzard themselves implemented it.
You can't sue the Chinese. That's like trying to stop porn. Even if you stop one server, five more will pop up.
Even if this crack goes live, the problem is that high profile tournaments cannot use it for better latency/connectivity. So unless Blizzard implements lan shortly after, then ultimately this crack only benefits pirates and lan parties. Although possible lan parties would benefit the community, in my opinion connectivity during major events is the big issue.
On July 05 2011 00:43 echO [W] wrote: They're going to get sued and shut down.
There's no way this will be used in any sort of mainstream/productive manner, given how involved Blizzard is with all the major SC2 tournaments and lans.
The only way I can see LAN in SC2 is if Blizzard themselves implemented it.
You can't sue the Chinese. That's like trying to stop porn. Even if you stop one server, five more will pop up.
This is exactly how it works. First of all, it's almost impossible to find the people responsible in China. If you end up finding these people, the government wont give you the opportunity to sue successfully. If you do end up sueing successfully, they will be replaced by other people and it will continue.
On July 05 2011 07:57 oBlade wrote: Like splitting the community into a Korean, European, and NA community?
no, like making sub communities within those regions. Making it much harder for ppl who pick up the game to find high level players/see high level play. because they're not in the "community"
Oh, okay, I understand. Like fracturing a global community into subcommunities. There is nothing good about Blizzard having a monopoly on ladders to their own game. E-sports is ground-up, not top-down. Games grow when third parties swarm to do stuff for them.
What monopoly? They're doing fine. This isn't BW days where BNET was utter shit. there is a Great ladder system in place along with solid Matchmaking. There is no need for a private server.
Match makings cool, most of the ladder maps sucks and we have to rely on blizzard to create new maps and add them every 3 months. I would kill to have a private server again for sc2 like in BW. I miss those days at times like these.
On July 05 2011 07:57 a_flayer wrote: And hey, since we're all buds now, why not release something official? It's already out there, might as well make it official and maybe Blizzard can get some more control/money back in their hands -that- way. Since that's what they're after. Just release a limited version of THEIR bnetd for a reasonable price to LANs so that they can host their own servers in a totally legit way.
Please. Every tournament in the world would happily pay for a server license or equivalent.
On July 05 2011 07:57 oBlade wrote: Like splitting the community into a Korean, European, and NA community?
no, like making sub communities within those regions. Making it much harder for ppl who pick up the game to find high level players/see high level play. because they're not in the "community"
Oh, okay, I understand. Like fracturing a global community into subcommunities. There is nothing good about Blizzard having a monopoly on ladders to their own game. E-sports is ground-up, not top-down. Games grow when third parties swarm to do stuff for them.
What monopoly? They're doing fine. This isn't BW days where BNET was utter shit. there is a Great ladder system in place along with solid Matchmaking. There is no need for a private server.
Actually, the NA ladder is becoming as bad as USWest with all those damn hackers (using guest passes)
I'd be happy for a new server if it was better maintained
Also, who really thinks blizz will be able to sue the Chinese modders? They can't even stop Chinese gold farming. Best thing they can do is stop tournaments from using it
So the drop hackers are bad, but these hackers are good? They did the same thing, only you guys actually get to profit off of this with an illegal LAN.
It'll get shut down anyway, Blizzard is going to kick the shit out of whoever is doing this. That is, unless the government throws a fit. Which they probably will.
On July 05 2011 12:20 Mauldo wrote: So the drop hackers are bad, but these hackers are good? They did the same thing, only you guys actually get to profit off of this with an illegal LAN.
It'll get shut down anyway, Blizzard is going to kick the shit out of whoever is doing this. That is, unless the government throws a fit. Which they probably will.
There is a big difference in downloading a script off google and double clicking it to take advantaged of flaws in the bnet0.2 to cheat someone out of pixel pts as opposed to reverse engineering the whole client/server relations and allowing people to play around the world lag free without even needing an internet connection.
On July 05 2011 07:57 a_flayer wrote: And hey, since we're all buds now, why not release something official? It's already out there, might as well make it official and maybe Blizzard can get some more control/money back in their hands -that- way. Since that's what they're after. Just release a limited version of THEIR bnetd for a reasonable price to LANs so that they can host their own servers in a totally legit way.
Please. Every tournament in the world would happily pay for a server license or equivalent.
i dont think it will get shut down piracy is all over china and the chinese government refuse to crackdown on anything despite of the pressure from the rest of the world. chances are, with in a year, 90% of the chinese players will be playing with this new crack and blizzard will rage quit away from their idea of selling sc2 to the chinese market.
On July 05 2011 07:57 a_flayer wrote: And hey, since we're all buds now, why not release something official? It's already out there, might as well make it official and maybe Blizzard can get some more control/money back in their hands -that- way. Since that's what they're after. Just release a limited version of THEIR bnetd for a reasonable price to LANs so that they can host their own servers in a totally legit way.
Please. Every tournament in the world would happily pay for a server license or equivalent.
On July 05 2011 07:57 a_flayer wrote: And hey, since we're all buds now, why not release something official? It's already out there, might as well make it official and maybe Blizzard can get some more control/money back in their hands -that- way. Since that's what they're after. Just release a limited version of THEIR bnetd for a reasonable price to LANs so that they can host their own servers in a totally legit way.
Please. Every tournament in the world would happily pay for a server license or equivalent.
That's a pretty ridiculous claim.
Okay let me rephrase, every tournament with any sense of legitimacy will pay for a server license.
On July 05 2011 08:29 Jago wrote: So Iccup is okay, but this isn't?
ICCUP and SC:BW is a totally different ballgame. SC:BW had LAN built into the game, SC2 doesn't.
No, I look at them the same. iCCup was a hacked/private server (against the blizzard TOS)
Yeah but I'm sure that Blizzard understood that in a lot of ways ICCUP and the other private servers were keeping BW alive outside of Korea
While this is likely part of it, there's also the fact that it's likely it wasn't possible for Blizzard to fix, the evidence being how much harder it's been to make it happen in SC2. Between drastic changes to the way the old Battle.net works, the inability to prevent distribution (even if it was fixed in a patch, there's nothing to stop people from using an earlier version), and the costs of litigation to get people to stop (Blizzard were popular before WoW, but they didn't have that much money), it really wasn't worth their time and money to shut down private servers. Nowadays, they've got resources we mere mortals quake to consider, and after seeing what happened to the guys who hacked the PS3 I don't want to think about what would befall the people that would make a viable easy-to-install-and-use LAN-capable alternative to Blizzard's Battle.net.
Which is unfortunate, because lately BNet 2.0's flaws (hackers running amok, messy leagues, very little moderation, poor international support, tournaments discarding the ladder map pool, still no freakin' LAN) have been becoming more and more apparent, and without a possible fix on the horizon until Heart of the Swarm (even then, I'm not holding my breath) there's really no alternative for unsatisfied players. This will only brew discontent and resentment, and while yes nobody's pirating the multiplayer game, there are plenty of people much less inclined to pick up the future expansions.
Also, as an aside, to those proposing that Blizzard release a tournament-only version of SC2 with LAN, dream on. All it takes is one punk with a 16GB flash drive and a tournament admin looking away for five minutes at a MLG or a Dreamhack or any other large-scale LAN and that shit is all over every torrent site you can name. They have to go all-or-nothing on LAN support, and for at least the time being it's going to be nothing.
since bnet 2.0 is like a server-ish kinda thing, it's only a matter of time before they found this crack. we used to think maplestory wouldn't have a private server but then it did. won't really be long before 'StarCraft II' appears on private server websites like gtop100.com :/
On July 05 2011 12:57 iamho wrote: May I ask the TL mods why we can't post links to the crack? I thought teamliquid was a Starcraft fansite, not a subsidiary of Blizzard.
On July 05 2011 07:57 a_flayer wrote: And hey, since we're all buds now, why not release something official? It's already out there, might as well make it official and maybe Blizzard can get some more control/money back in their hands -that- way. Since that's what they're after. Just release a limited version of THEIR bnetd for a reasonable price to LANs so that they can host their own servers in a totally legit way.
Please. Every tournament in the world would happily pay for a server license or equivalent.
That's a pretty ridiculous claim.
Okay let me rephrase, every tournament with any sense of legitimacy will pay for a server license.
Unfortunately, Blizz is the one who decide who is legit, who is not. All tournaments need their "blessing".
Question, but everyone is complaining about the offical Bnet being overrun by hacks. What is to stop 3rd party services that could be created from getting hacked by drop hackers? If a multi national corporation with a dedicated tech support group can't stop some bums from hacking their Battlenet, how is a bunch of volunteer mods on a 3rd party server gonna stop it? Am I missing something completely obvious?
Also I never used ICCup, but how is their ranking system better than Bnet 2.0s? I'm sorry but any system that puts 95% of the player base in one group is NOT a good system, regardless of how much nostalgic tingling you get from thinking about BW.
On July 05 2011 07:57 a_flayer wrote: And hey, since we're all buds now, why not release something official? It's already out there, might as well make it official and maybe Blizzard can get some more control/money back in their hands -that- way. Since that's what they're after. Just release a limited version of THEIR bnetd for a reasonable price to LANs so that they can host their own servers in a totally legit way.
Please. Every tournament in the world would happily pay for a server license or equivalent.
That's a pretty ridiculous claim.
Okay let me rephrase, every tournament with any sense of legitimacy will pay for a server license.
Unfortunately, Blizz is the one who decide who is legit, who is not. All tournaments need their "blessing".
On July 05 2011 13:11 Ryder. wrote: Question, but everyone is complaining about the offical Bnet being overrun by hacks. What is to stop 3rd party services that could be created from getting hacked by drop hackers? If a multi national corporation with a dedicated tech support group can't stop some bums from hacking their Battlenet, how is a bunch of volunteer mods on a 3rd party server gonna stop it? Am I missing something completely obvious.
You are missing the point of this hack. It's not trying to give you a clean/hackfree sc2 experience. It gives you ultra low laterncy game play instead.
I have a friend that works for blizzard and the plan after SC2 and both expansions are out, the game will have a LAN feature in it a year or so later when the sales of the games are super low. But thats not for a long time.
I dont see how Blizzard can stop this Chinese made server being that it is in China and can be relocated anywhere then reopen again for all the download.
On July 05 2011 13:11 Ryder. wrote: Question, but everyone is complaining about the offical Bnet being overrun by hacks. What is to stop 3rd party services that could be created from getting hacked by drop hackers? If a multi national corporation with a dedicated tech support group can't stop some bums from hacking their Battlenet, how is a bunch of volunteer mods on a 3rd party server gonna stop it? Am I missing something completely obvious.
You are missing the point of this hack. It's not trying to give you a clean/hackfree sc2 experience. It gives you ultra low laterncy game play instead.
No, I'm not. There are plenty of people in this very thread complaining about the problems with Bnet 2.0, saying that they would be fixed by 3rd party servers. If you want me to look through this thread and spoon feed them to you I will.
On July 05 2011 13:11 Ryder. wrote: Question, but everyone is complaining about the offical Bnet being overrun by hacks. What is to stop 3rd party services that could be created from getting hacked by drop hackers? If a multi national corporation with a dedicated tech support group can't stop some bums from hacking their Battlenet, how is a bunch of volunteer mods on a 3rd party server gonna stop it? Am I missing something completely obvious.
You are missing the point of this hack. It's not trying to give you a clean/hackfree sc2 experience. It gives you ultra low laterncy game play instead.
No, I'm not. There are plenty of people in this very thread complaining about the problems with Bnet 2.0, saying that they would be fixed by 3rd party servers. If you want me to look through this thread and spoon feed them to you I will.
You are not seeing the true potential of this hack. Just go back and read the posts that's by mod/admin/contributors. If you want me to look through this thread and spoon feed them to you I will.
On July 05 2011 13:16 HitStarcraft wrote: I have a friend that works for blizzard and the plan after SC2 and both expansions are out, the game will have a LAN feature in it a year or so later when the sales of the games are super low. But thats not for a long time.
I dont see how Blizzard can stop this Chinese made server being that it is in China and can be relocated anywhere then reopen again for all the download.
That would be great. Hehe =) Anyway I'm not sure if this will really take off unless a huge number of people switch over. The whole point of ladder is to have a lot of people playing at the same time.
isnt it possible that some country's such as china could tell blizzard fuck you and do what they want with a hacked lan mode? i mean what is blizzard really going to do?, go over to their country and arrest them? Just saying
its like america trying to shut down piratebay, its not gonna happen....
On July 05 2011 13:11 Ryder. wrote: Question, but everyone is complaining about the offical Bnet being overrun by hacks. What is to stop 3rd party services that could be created from getting hacked by drop hackers? If a multi national corporation with a dedicated tech support group can't stop some bums from hacking their Battlenet, how is a bunch of volunteer mods on a 3rd party server gonna stop it? Am I missing something completely obvious.
You are missing the point of this hack. It's not trying to give you a clean/hackfree sc2 experience. It gives you ultra low laterncy game play instead.
It can also deal w/ hacks better. Users can be IP banned for offenses by server admins, and bans would happen much faster compared to the current bnet ladder (seriously, gm hackers on guest accounts...)
On July 05 2011 13:11 Ryder. wrote: Question, but everyone is complaining about the offical Bnet being overrun by hacks. What is to stop 3rd party services that could be created from getting hacked by drop hackers? If a multi national corporation with a dedicated tech support group can't stop some bums from hacking their Battlenet, how is a bunch of volunteer mods on a 3rd party server gonna stop it? Am I missing something completely obvious.
You are missing the point of this hack. It's not trying to give you a clean/hackfree sc2 experience. It gives you ultra low laterncy game play instead.
No, I'm not. There are plenty of people in this very thread complaining about the problems with Bnet 2.0, saying that they would be fixed by 3rd party servers. If you want me to look through this thread and spoon feed them to you I will.
You are not seeing the true potential of this hack. Just go back and read the posts that's by mod/admin/contributors. If you want me to look through this thread and spoon feed them to you I will.
Your attempts to be witty seems to result in you completely ignoring what I said in the first place. I wasn't even referring to the 'true potential' of this hack, it had nothing to do what I was talking about... I asked a specific question and you decided to answer it with something completely unrelated, so thanks!
Edit: The bloke above me actually decided to help answer my question, so props to him
On July 05 2011 13:11 Ryder. wrote: Question, but everyone is complaining about the offical Bnet being overrun by hacks. What is to stop 3rd party services that could be created from getting hacked by drop hackers? If a multi national corporation with a dedicated tech support group can't stop some bums from hacking their Battlenet, how is a bunch of volunteer mods on a 3rd party server gonna stop it? Am I missing something completely obvious?
Also I never used ICCup, but how is their ranking system better than Bnet 2.0s? I'm sorry but any system that puts 95% of the player base in one group is NOT a good system, regardless of how much nostalgic tingling you get from thinking about BW.
First, on a private server like ICCup it's a lot easier to just not play against the drop hackers and whatnot. In the absence of automated matchmaking a lot of funny little things like this change. In a smaller player base (no matter how big a private server gets, it's not likely to get anywhere near as large as BNet) it's a lot easier to root out and keep out the bad seeds. Also, just compare how effective moderation is on the BNet forums compared to the moderation here on TL to see just how awesome a "bunch of volunteer mods" can be.
The ICCup ranking system was good because it really effectively and easily reflected gradations of skill at a (relatively) high level of play. Yes, a whole lot of people were at the D / D- level. But you could bet your ass that they were all worse than someone at the D+ / C- level. Same for every other rank as you climbed up the ladder. In SC2, how would the top 10 players in a Platinum division stack up against the bottom 50 players of a Diamond division (assuming all 100 players in each division are active)? It's nowhere near as clear-cut.
On the one hand, I don't see the new Activision-Blizzard tolerating this, but on the other hand, I don't see what they can do. It would be fruitless to try to sue the hackers in the Chinese jurisdiction and even if they sued them in an American jurisdiction, it's not going to be enforced in China unless there's political pressure accompanying it.
Of course they may just sue any US users of the hacked infrastructure as a deterrence method.
On July 05 2011 13:43 tyCe wrote: On the one hand, I don't see the new Activision-Blizzard tolerating this, but on the other hand, I don't see what they can do. It would be fruitless to try to sue the hackers in the Chinese jurisdiction and even if they sued them in an American jurisdiction, it's not going to be enforced in China unless there's political pressure accompanying it.
Of course they may just sue any US users of the hacked infrastructure as a deterrence method.
But then how would they know anyone would be using it if its not routing through Blizzards servers?
On July 05 2011 13:43 tyCe wrote: On the one hand, I don't see the new Activision-Blizzard tolerating this, but on the other hand, I don't see what they can do. It would be fruitless to try to sue the hackers in the Chinese jurisdiction and even if they sued them in an American jurisdiction, it's not going to be enforced in China unless there's political pressure accompanying it.
Of course they may just sue any US users of the hacked infrastructure as a deterrence method.
But then how would they know anyone would be using it if its not routing through Blizzards servers?
Probably won't matter for a bunch of friends laning in a basement
It applies more for, say, MLG to use a non-bnet server (especially when it is broadcasted)
On July 05 2011 13:43 tyCe wrote: On the one hand, I don't see the new Activision-Blizzard tolerating this, but on the other hand, I don't see what they can do. It would be fruitless to try to sue the hackers in the Chinese jurisdiction and even if they sued them in an American jurisdiction, it's not going to be enforced in China unless there's political pressure accompanying it.
Of course they may just sue any US users of the hacked infrastructure as a deterrence method.
But then how would they know anyone would be using it if its not routing through Blizzards servers?
Probably won't matter for a bunch of friends laning in a basement
It applies more for, say, MLG to use a non-bnet server (especially when it is broadcasted)
Yeah, fair enough. As stated by others though im sure the major tournies would never use this anyway.
On July 05 2011 13:11 Ryder. wrote: Question, but everyone is complaining about the offical Bnet being overrun by hacks. What is to stop 3rd party services that could be created from getting hacked by drop hackers? If a multi national corporation with a dedicated tech support group can't stop some bums from hacking their Battlenet, how is a bunch of volunteer mods on a 3rd party server gonna stop it? Am I missing something completely obvious.
You are missing the point of this hack. It's not trying to give you a clean/hackfree sc2 experience. It gives you ultra low laterncy game play instead.
No, I'm not. There are plenty of people in this very thread complaining about the problems with Bnet 2.0, saying that they would be fixed by 3rd party servers. If you want me to look through this thread and spoon feed them to you I will.
Small community based servers with well voulenteer mods tends to be efficient at providing good game environment. its the same with all blizz games, the case really presents itself, there is little to debate: d2, sc1, wow are all filled with hacks and spam in official blizz servers, yet private servers manage to offer clean vibrant hack free experience.
This has been out for a long, long time. It's been out there and Chinese players have been using it for a while but it has not made it's away to the European and American seen, yet. I don't think it will to be honest as Blizzard will breathe down any Tournament's neck if they use this.
Anyone dreaming of a 3rd party BNet: So far this crack allows one game per host / BNet server. So the one running the server is the only one who can create a game and the ones connecting can join that one game, nothing else. It's a dirty hack and miles from an actual BNet server.
If an actual Bnet server becomes fully developed, I think I might just switch to that. I paid the $60 to Blizzard already, so I did my duty supporting the developers. I just want to play on a server that caters more towards me.
On July 05 2011 14:24 zatic wrote: Anyone dreaming of a 3rd party BNet: So far this crack allows one game per host / BNet server. So the one running the server is the only one who can create a game and the ones connecting can join that one game, nothing else. It's a dirty hack and miles from an actual BNet server.
Garena will probably find some way to make it work just like how they can rank people in dota.
I guess its just matter of time until these kind of crack pop up, now lets hope blizzard react quickly and come up with a lan of their own.
On July 05 2011 14:32 Chairman Ray wrote: If an actual Bnet server becomes fully developed, I think I might just switch to that. I paid the $60 to Blizzard already, so I did my duty supporting the developers. I just want to play on a server that caters more towards me.
On July 05 2011 14:24 zatic wrote: Anyone dreaming of a 3rd party BNet: So far this crack allows one game per host / BNet server. So the one running the server is the only one who can create a game and the ones connecting can join that one game, nothing else. It's a dirty hack and miles from an actual BNet server.
Garena will probably find some way to make it work just like how they can rank people in dota.
I guess its just matter of time until these kind of crack pop up, now lets hope blizzard react quickly and come up with a lan of their own.
There is no way for Garena to make it work because I'm pretty sure Blizzard will immediately take action. The only way I can see this hack/crack working is for a small group of people who want to play together without using Battle Net 2.0.
Can't wait for SC2 ICCUP, it would have a way better map pool, and use a ranking system that actually makes sense.
Gonna have a wet dream about getting C+ while playing on TestBug, Fighting Spirit, Great Barrier Reef (LOL), etc.
If Blizzard doesn't like it, well stiff shit, maybe they should stop trying to "cater to the casuals" and hire people that actually know how to make maps and run a proper ladder.
On July 05 2011 14:42 sluggaslamoo wrote: Can't wait for SC2 ICCUP, it would have a way better map pool, and use a ranking system that actually makes sense.
Gonna have a wet dream about getting C+ while playing on TestBug, Fighting Spirit, Great Barrier Reef (LOL), etc.
If Blizzard doesn't like it, well stiff shit, maybe they should stop trying to "cater to the casuals" and hire people that actually know how to make maps and run a proper ladder.
while i dont think a custom server that goes against blizzard is the right way to go, something like this is 100% needed
On July 05 2011 14:42 sluggaslamoo wrote: Can't wait for SC2 ICCUP, it would have a way better map pool, and use a ranking system that actually makes sense.
Gonna have a wet dream about getting C+ while playing on TestBug, Fighting Spirit, Great Barrier Reef (LOL), etc.
If Blizzard doesn't like it, well stiff shit, maybe they should stop trying to "cater to the casuals" and hire people that actually know how to make maps and run a proper ladder.
ranking system is fine for sc2. Dunno why u think theres something wrong with it
On July 05 2011 14:42 sluggaslamoo wrote: Can't wait for SC2 ICCUP, it would have a way better map pool, and use a ranking system that actually makes sense.
Gonna have a wet dream about getting C+ while playing on TestBug, Fighting Spirit, Great Barrier Reef (LOL), etc.
If Blizzard doesn't like it, well stiff shit, maybe they should stop trying to "cater to the casuals" and hire people that actually know how to make maps and run a proper ladder.
ranking system is fine for sc2. Dunno why u think theres something wrong with it
You mean you think it is okay that there is a system in place which automatically makes a player who played 1000 games better than a player who has played 200 games?
On July 05 2011 14:24 zatic wrote: Anyone dreaming of a 3rd party BNet: So far this crack allows one game per host / BNet server. So the one running the server is the only one who can create a game and the ones connecting can join that one game, nothing else. It's a dirty hack and miles from an actual BNet server.
Garena will probably find some way to make it work just like how they can rank people in dota.
I guess its just matter of time until these kind of crack pop up, now lets hope blizzard react quickly and come up with a lan of their own.
There is no way for Garena to make it work because I'm pretty sure Blizzard will immediately take action. The only way I can see this hack/crack working is for a small group of people who want to play together without using Battle Net 2.0.
Garena won't be able to do anything with this. The reason that Garena can use Warcraft III is because Garena isn't manipulating any of the game files. It's simply tricking where the data goes. There's absolutely nothing illegal about that. If players are using illegitimate copies, tough shit. That's not on Garena.
On July 05 2011 14:42 sluggaslamoo wrote: Can't wait for SC2 ICCUP, it would have a way better map pool, and use a ranking system that actually makes sense.
Gonna have a wet dream about getting C+ while playing on TestBug, Fighting Spirit, Great Barrier Reef (LOL), etc.
If Blizzard doesn't like it, well stiff shit, maybe they should stop trying to "cater to the casuals" and hire people that actually know how to make maps and run a proper ladder.
ranking system is fine for sc2. Dunno why u think theres something wrong with it
You mean you think it is okay that there is a system in place which automatically makes a player who played 1000 games better than a player who has played 200 games?
huh.
You ment the rating? Do anyone other than GM actually care about their rating. And no, MMR doesn't work like what you mentioned.
On July 05 2011 14:42 sluggaslamoo wrote: Can't wait for SC2 ICCUP, it would have a way better map pool, and use a ranking system that actually makes sense.
Gonna have a wet dream about getting C+ while playing on TestBug, Fighting Spirit, Great Barrier Reef (LOL), etc.
If Blizzard doesn't like it, well stiff shit, maybe they should stop trying to "cater to the casuals" and hire people that actually know how to make maps and run a proper ladder.
ranking system is fine for sc2. Dunno why u think theres something wrong with it
You mean you think it is okay that there is a system in place which automatically makes a player who played 1000 games better than a player who has played 200 games?
huh.
You ment the rating? Do anyone other than GM actually care about their rating. And no, MMR doesn't work like what you mentioned.
Matchmaking Rating doesn't work that way, you're right. But your actual visible rating rewards continuous play over skilled play. That's the purpose of a bonus pool that continues to grow indefinitely.
On July 05 2011 14:42 sluggaslamoo wrote: Can't wait for SC2 ICCUP, it would have a way better map pool, and use a ranking system that actually makes sense.
Gonna have a wet dream about getting C+ while playing on TestBug, Fighting Spirit, Great Barrier Reef (LOL), etc.
If Blizzard doesn't like it, well stiff shit, maybe they should stop trying to "cater to the casuals" and hire people that actually know how to make maps and run a proper ladder.
ranking system is fine for sc2. Dunno why u think theres something wrong with it
You mean you think it is okay that there is a system in place which automatically makes a player who played 1000 games better than a player who has played 200 games?
huh.
You ment the rating? Do anyone other than GM actually care about their rating. And no, MMR doesn't work like what you mentioned.
Matchmaking Rating doesn't work that way, you're right. But your actual visible rating rewards continuous play over skilled play. That's the purpose of a bonus pool that continues to grow indefinitely.
Like I said, no one care about their visible rating. Ok, I reread that, I agree blizzard is a joke at presenting the ranking ladder so that it doesn't make any sense at all.
On July 05 2011 14:42 sluggaslamoo wrote: Can't wait for SC2 ICCUP, it would have a way better map pool, and use a ranking system that actually makes sense.
Gonna have a wet dream about getting C+ while playing on TestBug, Fighting Spirit, Great Barrier Reef (LOL), etc.
If Blizzard doesn't like it, well stiff shit, maybe they should stop trying to "cater to the casuals" and hire people that actually know how to make maps and run a proper ladder.
ranking system is fine for sc2. Dunno why u think theres something wrong with it
The ranking system is a joke. In iccup if you got to A- rank you were good for a foreigner. In sc2 you can be grandmaster and still be terrible. Ranking system is nowhere near as good as I feel it could have been. I'm surprised you think its good.
On July 05 2011 14:42 sluggaslamoo wrote: Can't wait for SC2 ICCUP, it would have a way better map pool, and use a ranking system that actually makes sense.
Gonna have a wet dream about getting C+ while playing on TestBug, Fighting Spirit, Great Barrier Reef (LOL), etc.
If Blizzard doesn't like it, well stiff shit, maybe they should stop trying to "cater to the casuals" and hire people that actually know how to make maps and run a proper ladder.
ranking system is fine for sc2. Dunno why u think theres something wrong with it
You mean you think it is okay that there is a system in place which automatically makes a player who played 1000 games better than a player who has played 200 games?
huh.
You ment the rating? Do anyone other than GM actually care about their rating. And no, MMR doesn't work like what you mentioned.
Matchmaking Rating doesn't work that way, you're right. But your actual visible rating rewards continuous play over skilled play. That's the purpose of a bonus pool that continues to grow indefinitely.
Like I said, no one care about their visible rating. Ok, I reread that, I agree blizzard is a joke at presenting the ranking ladder so that it doesn't make any sense at all.
It's designed to help weaker players feel a sense of accomplishment and progress when they aren't necessarily getting any better at the game. I'd go into further detail, but I'm writing a pretty detailed synopsis of that issue with the ladder to go with a couple of other talking points on the service. I don't have the energy to handle it right now. o.o
On July 05 2011 15:34 T0fuuu wrote: And with this Chinas sc2 scene is set to dominate the world! Let the Koreans have their day in the sun because it wont be for long!
actually koreans are crazy for this stuff too. free games are a big deal, like copy of cs, pirate sc1 servers etc.
blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
On July 05 2011 12:20 Mauldo wrote: So the drop hackers are bad, but these hackers are good? They did the same thing, only you guys actually get to profit off of this with an illegal LAN.
It'll get shut down anyway, Blizzard is going to kick the shit out of whoever is doing this. That is, unless the government throws a fit. Which they probably will.
Drop hackers are DROP HACKING to gain an unfair advantage, these hackers are hacking to implement a feature that Blizzard should have implemented since beta.
Until now no one made a LAN Crack public and everyone who claimed to make one or has one got sued by blizzard. Now it’s a whole different story since THIS IS PUBLIC blizzard cant do shit besides warning everyone who uses it gets banned but this will only hurt legit customers (like always) and not the ones playing via hamatchi and consorts who don’t even have a legit copy. Since this is public even if they get the chinese guy who develops it there are many others in the underground who will get to work with this code… It was a huge win for activision/blizzard that the system holds for almost 1 year, now its time to give the community what they deserve -> LAN Modus!
Blizzard was my absolute favorite and only gaming company I buyed EVERY game and if available in collectors edition (and often times I bought them more then once for language reasons). God damn I even buyed all WoW expansions in CE even when I stopped playing it since burning crusade was released... But since activision they are becoming more and more a joke and I start loosing all my believes in this once great company. Well I guess money makes the world go round and destroy once brave man.
On July 05 2011 07:57 a_flayer wrote: And hey, since we're all buds now, why not release something official? It's already out there, might as well make it official and maybe Blizzard can get some more control/money back in their hands -that- way. Since that's what they're after. Just release a limited version of THEIR bnetd for a reasonable price to LANs so that they can host their own servers in a totally legit way.
Please. Every tournament in the world would happily pay for a server license or equivalent.
Blizzard has no reason not to implement LAN. Lost of sales because of potential piracy is just bullshit considering what these Chinese wizards can conjure.
On July 05 2011 17:20 KingofHearts wrote: blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
The reason that blizzard still exists as a company is BECAUSE they care about profit. Do you think Blizzard would have spent as much money and time making SC2 if they knew it could be played online with pirated versions (thus decreasing sales)? Of course not.
Companies who don't care about profit are generally end up bankrupt.
It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games.
You should hope that blizzard continues to care about profit, because the more profit blizzard makes, the more money they have to spend making great games.
On July 05 2011 15:34 T0fuuu wrote: And with this Chinas sc2 scene is set to dominate the world! Let the Koreans have their day in the sun because it wont be for long!
actually koreans are crazy for this stuff too. free games are a big deal, like copy of cs, pirate sc1 servers etc.
CS sorta died in korea when valve wanted to put a fee on pc bangs in order to play it...playing at home wouldn't have the same experience... but to play at those places = extra money...
Dream on boys. I am actually willing to bet on this crack being useless in a couple of patches. And that it will take a long time to crack it again after that.
When they decided no LAN I'm pretty sure Blizzard thought about how they were going to prevent private servers from surviving.
As a third, correct me if I'm wrong but nowadays computers don't have actual LAN anymore do they? Not in the same way it was understood before (IPX) so there is no way to have separate ways to play on LAN vs on Internet, even if the game would allow direct connections.
On July 05 2011 19:13 dakalro wrote: As a third, correct me if I'm wrong but nowadays computers don't have actual LAN anymore do they? Not in the same way it was understood before (IPX) so there is no way to have separate ways to play on LAN vs on Internet, even if the game would allow direct connections.
You are correct, but what people mean by "LAN mode" nowadays is some form of direct connection where the players can decide which machine is the host, something that would allow you to restrict the network traffic from the game to within a certain network instead of requiring an internet connection.
On July 05 2011 19:13 dakalro wrote: As a third, correct me if I'm wrong but nowadays computers don't have actual LAN anymore do they? Not in the same way it was understood before (IPX) so there is no way to have separate ways to play on LAN vs on Internet, even if the game would allow direct connections.
You are correct, but what people mean by "LAN mode" nowadays is some form of direct connection where the players can decide which machine is the host, something that would allow you to restrict the network traffic from the game to within a certain network instead of requiring an internet connection.
Well I know there is "LAN" for games...I play Borderlands on LAN with my roomates.
On July 05 2011 17:20 KingofHearts wrote: blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
The reason that blizzard still exists as a company is BECAUSE they care about profit. Do you think Blizzard would have spent as much money and time making SC2 if they knew it could be played online with pirated versions (thus decreasing sales)? Of course not.
Companies who don't care about profit are generally end up bankrupt.
It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games.
You should hope that blizzard continues to care about profit, because the more profit blizzard makes, the more money they have to spend making great games.
It's actually how computers work and then the internet's fault. The internet is nothing but copies. Like this post is when you read it form your end. Ever piece of code in your computer is a copy. Blaming pirates is as dumb and illogical as blaming the local weather guy when the weather doesn't go your way. But I'm sure subtle, social manipulation/programming implanted by movers and shakes can make you think so.
This is the nature of computering, even if you don't like. The sooner the corporate world accepts this fact of nature, and start making products thereafter, the better.
On July 05 2011 17:20 KingofHearts wrote: blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
The reason that blizzard still exists as a company is BECAUSE they care about profit. Do you think Blizzard would have spent as much money and time making SC2 if they knew it could be played online with pirated versions (thus decreasing sales)? Of course not.
Companies who don't care about profit are generally end up bankrupt.
It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games.
You should hope that blizzard continues to care about profit, because the more profit blizzard makes, the more money they have to spend making great games.
There is a difference between making profit and maximizing profit.
SC2 with LAN would have surely made about the same money as without it, just a little less. But because a little less is not acceptable they excluded it.
The problem lies in the greediness of companies listed at the stock market.
On July 05 2011 13:11 Ryder. wrote: Question, but everyone is complaining about the offical Bnet being overrun by hacks. What is to stop 3rd party services that could be created from getting hacked by drop hackers? If a multi national corporation with a dedicated tech support group can't stop some bums from hacking their Battlenet, how is a bunch of volunteer mods on a 3rd party server gonna stop it? Am I missing something completely obvious.
You are missing the point of this hack. It's not trying to give you a clean/hackfree sc2 experience. It gives you ultra low laterncy game play instead.
No, I'm not. There are plenty of people in this very thread complaining about the problems with Bnet 2.0, saying that they would be fixed by 3rd party servers. If you want me to look through this thread and spoon feed them to you I will.
You are not seeing the true potential of this hack. Just go back and read the posts that's by mod/admin/contributors. If you want me to look through this thread and spoon feed them to you I will.
Your attempts to be witty seems to result in you completely ignoring what I said in the first place. I wasn't even referring to the 'true potential' of this hack, it had nothing to do what I was talking about... I asked a specific question and you decided to answer it with something completely unrelated, so thanks!
Edit: The bloke above me actually decided to help answer my question, so props to him
That's because what you are talking about is actually unrealistic/unrelated. Being able to emulate bnet protocols does not mean they have also magically gain the source code for blizz's bnet abuse detection system.
And regarding the witty comment. Let me be a kid and said: You started it! And it was unnecessary in the first place. You simple misunderstood/over estimated this hack. I was merely pointing that out to you.
On July 05 2011 17:20 KingofHearts wrote: blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
The reason that blizzard still exists as a company is BECAUSE they care about profit. Do you think Blizzard would have spent as much money and time making SC2 if they knew it could be played online with pirated versions (thus decreasing sales)? Of course not.
Companies who don't care about profit are generally end up bankrupt.
It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games.
You should hope that blizzard continues to care about profit, because the more profit blizzard makes, the more money they have to spend making great games.
Valve games have LAN. Valve isn't bankrupt due to piracy. Valve makes enough profit to buy out dev teams and project licenses, while still being able to appeal to shareholders. Seems like they're doing fine to me.
Blizzard won't up and dissapear if SC2 gets pirated a little. All of their old games got pirated, there's hundreds of thousands of people who play on WoW private servers, and they (as a company) are still going on strong. Hell, SC2 already got pirated a bunch of times on release, anyway. Adding LAN =! not caring about profit. Adding LAN, however, does = caring about quality competition and caring about your fanbase.
On July 05 2011 13:11 Ryder. wrote: Question, but everyone is complaining about the offical Bnet being overrun by hacks. What is to stop 3rd party services that could be created from getting hacked by drop hackers? If a multi national corporation with a dedicated tech support group can't stop some bums from hacking their Battlenet, how is a bunch of volunteer mods on a 3rd party server gonna stop it? Am I missing something completely obvious?
Also I never used ICCup, but how is their ranking system better than Bnet 2.0s? I'm sorry but any system that puts 95% of the player base in one group is NOT a good system, regardless of how much nostalgic tingling you get from thinking about BW.
Well, you are missing something completely obvious. Back in the day, blizzard was even shittier at stopping hackers, so the community made anti-hacks. This programs would kick the other opponent off of the game if a hack was detected, and since the community is much quicker to react to these situations than blizzard is, they generally were 1000000x better than any solutions blizzard came up with. iCCup still uses anti-hacks, and they work. I wouldn't see any reason why they couldn't implement something like this.
Now, as for iCCup's rankings, it's just a different taste. It's a perfectly fine system, in that it doesn't lie to you to make you feel better, and give you bullshit stats like points to make you think you're progressing, when you are in fact stagnating. In iCCup, if you're bad, you're stuck at D. If you're bad on bnet 2.0, don't worry! You're the top of your bronze ladder! Everyone's a champion, timmy!
ICCup is not catering to a casual crowd, and I'm pretty sure a hacked bnet server wouldn't be too worried about getting a casual crowd of gamers over there to play. So you're just making points against the server when they actually have no basis in reality. What you should be saying, is that can they make the servers run well? Most WoW private servers don't run well at all. I wouldn't be suprised if this takes a couple of years to iron out kinks.
On July 05 2011 17:20 KingofHearts wrote: blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
The reason that blizzard still exists as a company is BECAUSE they care about profit. Do you think Blizzard would have spent as much money and time making SC2 if they knew it could be played online with pirated versions (thus decreasing sales)? Of course not.
Companies who don't care about profit are generally end up bankrupt.
It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games.
You should hope that blizzard continues to care about profit, because the more profit blizzard makes, the more money they have to spend making great games.
There is a difference between making profit and maximizing profit.
SC2 with LAN would have surely made about the same money as without it, just a little less. But because a little less is not acceptable they excluded it.
The problem lies in the greediness of companies listed at the stock market.
One of the biggest problem with this business model is that it threats all buyers as criminals and thus expands a massive void between the buyers and the business. Why should the buyers respect and want to support a company that threats you as such? I do hope this greedy business model backfires on them and that the future business model is more of a 'mutual respect model' thus making the buyers want to buy your product and feel good about it. I sure didn't feel good about buying SCII from Blizzard and might not do it again.
Edit: Also, we'd have to substrat the potential buyers that didn't buy SCII becuase of the lack of lan, from the equation.
On July 05 2011 17:20 KingofHearts wrote: blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
The reason that blizzard still exists as a company is BECAUSE they care about profit. Do you think Blizzard would have spent as much money and time making SC2 if they knew it could be played online with pirated versions (thus decreasing sales)? Of course not.
Companies who don't care about profit are generally end up bankrupt.
It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games.
You should hope that blizzard continues to care about profit, because the more profit blizzard makes, the more money they have to spend making great games.
There is a difference between making profit and maximizing profit.
SC2 with LAN would have surely made about the same money as without it, just a little less. But because a little less is not acceptable they excluded it.
The problem lies in the greediness of companies listed at the stock market.
One of the biggest problem with this business model is that it threats all buyers as criminals and thus expands a massive void between the buyers and the business. Why should the buyers respect and want to support a company that threats you as such? I do hope this greedy business model backfires on them and that the future business model is more of a 'mutual respect model' thus making the buyers want to buy your product and feel good about it. I sure didn't feel good about buying SCII from Blizzard and might not do it again.
Edit: Also, we'd have to substrat the potential buyers that didn't buy SCII becuase of the lack of lan, from the equation.
This is totally true. I know a couple of people who would have bought the game had it been released with LAN support.
On July 05 2011 17:20 KingofHearts wrote: blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
The reason that blizzard still exists as a company is BECAUSE they care about profit. Do you think Blizzard would have spent as much money and time making SC2 if they knew it could be played online with pirated versions (thus decreasing sales)? Of course not.
Companies who don't care about profit are generally end up bankrupt.
It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games.
You should hope that blizzard continues to care about profit, because the more profit blizzard makes, the more money they have to spend making great games.
Valve games have LAN. Valve isn't bankrupt due to piracy. Valve makes enough profit to buy out dev teams and project licenses, while still being able to appeal to shareholders. Seems like they're doing fine to me.
Blizzard won't up and dissapear if SC2 gets pirated a little. All of their old games got pirated, there's hundreds of thousands of people who play on WoW private servers, and they (as a company) are still going on strong. Hell, SC2 already got pirated a bunch of times on release, anyway. Adding LAN =! not caring about profit. Adding LAN, however, does = caring about quality competition and caring about your fanbase.
Yeah, it seems that the lack of LAN is nothing but a gesture to calm down the stockholders that doesn't actually make much practical sense. It's a bad trade-off, imo. It only goes to alienates the customers more than anything else.
This is inevitable and unstoppable; I only wonder why it took so long. Well, there were some previous shut down attempts. Perhaps Blizz will shut this down too, but on the long run it can't be prevented. So yeah, LAN-latency will be able to achieve soon, by anyone when needed. I don't think it will hurt Blizzard financially, because battle.net offers many useful services, so people will use both.
On July 05 2011 17:20 KingofHearts wrote: blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
The reason that blizzard still exists as a company is BECAUSE they care about profit. Do you think Blizzard would have spent as much money and time making SC2 if they knew it could be played online with pirated versions (thus decreasing sales)? Of course not.
Companies who don't care about profit are generally end up bankrupt.
It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games.
You should hope that blizzard continues to care about profit, because the more profit blizzard makes, the more money they have to spend making great games.
Valve games have LAN. Valve isn't bankrupt due to piracy. Valve makes enough profit to buy out dev teams and project licenses, while still being able to appeal to shareholders. Seems like they're doing fine to me.
Blizzard won't up and dissapear if SC2 gets pirated a little. All of their old games got pirated, there's hundreds of thousands of people who play on WoW private servers, and they (as a company) are still going on strong. Hell, SC2 already got pirated a bunch of times on release, anyway. Adding LAN =! not caring about profit. Adding LAN, however, does = caring about quality competition and caring about your fanbase.
Yeah, it seems that the lack of LAN is nothing but a gesture to calm down the stockholders that doesn't actually make much practical sense.
Well, it makes sense from a shareholders POV. It increases chances to be pirated, and that's not good, because in their minds, a pirated version of the game = a bought version of the game, which just isn't true.
once there is an english version I doubt blizz can do much about it. They could change all the crypt routines and that would require hackers to reverse everything again, but the game is fairly balanced at the moment and the pirates would just stick to the hacked version. Once the server is out, they can sue as long as they want. I own the game, but I'd be happy if I could play it at LAN parties with my friends, cause where we hold LANs, there generally is no internet. I'm actually surprised it took that long to reverse engineer it.
On July 05 2011 17:20 KingofHearts wrote: blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
The reason that blizzard still exists as a company is BECAUSE they care about profit. Do you think Blizzard would have spent as much money and time making SC2 if they knew it could be played online with pirated versions (thus decreasing sales)? Of course not.
Companies who don't care about profit are generally end up bankrupt.
It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games.
You should hope that blizzard continues to care about profit, because the more profit blizzard makes, the more money they have to spend making great games.
Valve games have LAN. Valve isn't bankrupt due to piracy. Valve makes enough profit to buy out dev teams and project licenses, while still being able to appeal to shareholders. Seems like they're doing fine to me.
Blizzard won't up and dissapear if SC2 gets pirated a little. All of their old games got pirated, there's hundreds of thousands of people who play on WoW private servers, and they (as a company) are still going on strong. Hell, SC2 already got pirated a bunch of times on release, anyway. Adding LAN =! not caring about profit. Adding LAN, however, does = caring about quality competition and caring about your fanbase.
Yeah, it seems that the lack of LAN is nothing but a gesture to calm down the stockholders that doesn't actually make much practical sense. It's a bad trade-off, imo. It only goes to alienates the customers more than anything else.
The removal of LAN is about these things in the following order: "Consolidation of intellectual property", "licensing of StarCraft professional gaming scene", "software piracy". There is lots and lots of money to be made by gradually tethering all Blizzard products into a central service and claiming your intellectual property rights are being violated when any modification of the game occurs. See: The price of downloadable content (user-made or company-made) after XBox Live became popular.
On July 05 2011 17:20 KingofHearts wrote: blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
The reason that blizzard still exists as a company is BECAUSE they care about profit. Do you think Blizzard would have spent as much money and time making SC2 if they knew it could be played online with pirated versions (thus decreasing sales)? Of course not.
Companies who don't care about profit are generally end up bankrupt.
It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games.
You should hope that blizzard continues to care about profit, because the more profit blizzard makes, the more money they have to spend making great games.
Valve games have LAN. Valve isn't bankrupt due to piracy. Valve makes enough profit to buy out dev teams and project licenses, while still being able to appeal to shareholders. Seems like they're doing fine to me.
Blizzard won't up and dissapear if SC2 gets pirated a little. All of their old games got pirated, there's hundreds of thousands of people who play on WoW private servers, and they (as a company) are still going on strong. Hell, SC2 already got pirated a bunch of times on release, anyway. Adding LAN =! not caring about profit. Adding LAN, however, does = caring about quality competition and caring about your fanbase.
On July 05 2011 13:11 Ryder. wrote: Question, but everyone is complaining about the offical Bnet being overrun by hacks. What is to stop 3rd party services that could be created from getting hacked by drop hackers? If a multi national corporation with a dedicated tech support group can't stop some bums from hacking their Battlenet, how is a bunch of volunteer mods on a 3rd party server gonna stop it? Am I missing something completely obvious?
Also I never used ICCup, but how is their ranking system better than Bnet 2.0s? I'm sorry but any system that puts 95% of the player base in one group is NOT a good system, regardless of how much nostalgic tingling you get from thinking about BW.
Well, you are missing something completely obvious. Back in the day, blizzard was even shittier at stopping hackers, so the community made anti-hacks. This programs would kick the other opponent off of the game if a hack was detected, and since the community is much quicker to react to these situations than blizzard is, they generally were 1000000x better than any solutions blizzard came up with. iCCup still uses anti-hacks, and they work. I wouldn't see any reason why they couldn't implement something like this.
I would like to point out that the community made anti after blizz "gave up" on bw. But with SC2 we are dealing with a slightly different scenario here. ATM blizz still cares about SC2, so if I ever have to pick a side, I would say blizzard has the best anti hack tech atm.
On July 05 2011 17:20 KingofHearts wrote: blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
The reason that blizzard still exists as a company is BECAUSE they care about profit. Do you think Blizzard would have spent as much money and time making SC2 if they knew it could be played online with pirated versions (thus decreasing sales)? Of course not.
Companies who don't care about profit are generally end up bankrupt.
It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games.
You should hope that blizzard continues to care about profit, because the more profit blizzard makes, the more money they have to spend making great games.
Valve games have LAN. Valve isn't bankrupt due to piracy. Valve makes enough profit to buy out dev teams and project licenses, while still being able to appeal to shareholders. Seems like they're doing fine to me.
Blizzard won't up and dissapear if SC2 gets pirated a little. All of their old games got pirated, there's hundreds of thousands of people who play on WoW private servers, and they (as a company) are still going on strong. Hell, SC2 already got pirated a bunch of times on release, anyway. Adding LAN =! not caring about profit. Adding LAN, however, does = caring about quality competition and caring about your fanbase.
Yeah, it seems that the lack of LAN is nothing but a gesture to calm down the stockholders that doesn't actually make much practical sense. It's a bad trade-off, imo. It only goes to alienates the customers more than anything else.
The removal of LAN is about these things in the following order: "Consolidation of intellectual property", "licensing of StarCraft professional gaming scene", "software piracy". There is lots and lots of money to be made by gradually tethering all Blizzard products into a central service and claiming your intellectual property rights are being violated when any modification of the game occurs. See: The price of downloadable content (user-made or company-made) after XBox Live became popular.
You are ofcourse right about these things you listed here.
It's very, very scary to me how little control we as users will have left if this trend continues grow and expand.
On July 05 2011 17:20 KingofHearts wrote: blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
The reason that blizzard still exists as a company is BECAUSE they care about profit. Do you think Blizzard would have spent as much money and time making SC2 if they knew it could be played online with pirated versions (thus decreasing sales)? Of course not.
Companies who don't care about profit are generally end up bankrupt.
It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games.
You should hope that blizzard continues to care about profit, because the more profit blizzard makes, the more money they have to spend making great games.
Valve games have LAN. Valve isn't bankrupt due to piracy. Valve makes enough profit to buy out dev teams and project licenses, while still being able to appeal to shareholders. Seems like they're doing fine to me.
Blizzard won't up and dissapear if SC2 gets pirated a little. All of their old games got pirated, there's hundreds of thousands of people who play on WoW private servers, and they (as a company) are still going on strong. Hell, SC2 already got pirated a bunch of times on release, anyway. Adding LAN =! not caring about profit. Adding LAN, however, does = caring about quality competition and caring about your fanbase.
Yeah, it seems that the lack of LAN is nothing but a gesture to calm down the stockholders that doesn't actually make much practical sense. It's a bad trade-off, imo. It only goes to alienates the customers more than anything else.
The removal of LAN is about these things in the following order: "Consolidation of intellectual property", "licensing of StarCraft professional gaming scene", "software piracy". There is lots and lots of money to be made by gradually tethering all Blizzard products into a central service and claiming your intellectual property rights are being violated when any modification of the game occurs. See: The price of downloadable content (user-made or company-made) after XBox Live became popular.
You are ofcourse right about these things you listed here.
It's very, very scary to me how little control we as users will have left if this trend continues grow and expand.
Well, I guess there needs to be a concerted effort to educate people on the topic. However, it's quite difficult to do that when people still believe Blizzard got rid of the Local Area Network function because a bunch of kids in Vietnam who are lucky to see 100 dollars a month managed to download the game off the internet. It's an uphill battle.
On July 05 2011 17:20 KingofHearts wrote: blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
The reason that blizzard still exists as a company is BECAUSE they care about profit. Do you think Blizzard would have spent as much money and time making SC2 if they knew it could be played online with pirated versions (thus decreasing sales)? Of course not.
Companies who don't care about profit are generally end up bankrupt.
It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games.
You should hope that blizzard continues to care about profit, because the more profit blizzard makes, the more money they have to spend making great games.
Valve games have LAN. Valve isn't bankrupt due to piracy. Valve makes enough profit to buy out dev teams and project licenses, while still being able to appeal to shareholders. Seems like they're doing fine to me.
Blizzard won't up and dissapear if SC2 gets pirated a little. All of their old games got pirated, there's hundreds of thousands of people who play on WoW private servers, and they (as a company) are still going on strong. Hell, SC2 already got pirated a bunch of times on release, anyway. Adding LAN =! not caring about profit. Adding LAN, however, does = caring about quality competition and caring about your fanbase.
Yeah, it seems that the lack of LAN is nothing but a gesture to calm down the stockholders that doesn't actually make much practical sense. It's a bad trade-off, imo. It only goes to alienates the customers more than anything else.
The removal of LAN is about these things in the following order: "Consolidation of intellectual property", "licensing of StarCraft professional gaming scene", "software piracy". There is lots and lots of money to be made by gradually tethering all Blizzard products into a central service and claiming your intellectual property rights are being violated when any modification of the game occurs. See: The price of downloadable content (user-made or company-made) after XBox Live became popular.
You are ofcourse right about these things you listed here.
It's very, very scary to me how little control we as users will have left if this trend continues grow and expand.
Well, I guess there needs to be a concerted effort to educate people on the topic. However, it's quite difficult to do that when people still believe Blizzard got rid of the Local Area Network function because a bunch of kids in Vietnam who are lucky to see 100 dollars a month managed to download the game off the internet. It's an uphill battle.
I do believe you make a strong point there. I never doubted that it all comes down to control, though, as I have stated in some of my other posts (not in this thread). But it's understandable that we tend to focus on LAN as that's what's close to us. I do hope most people can see the bigger picture than not - and care about it.
Businesses is about making money, naturally, but there's many models of during so. I don't actually think people mind businesses making lots of money. Blizzard's model is questionable, though.
On July 05 2011 12:20 Mauldo wrote: So the drop hackers are bad, but these hackers are good? They did the same thing, only you guys actually get to profit off of this with an illegal LAN.
It'll get shut down anyway, Blizzard is going to kick the shit out of whoever is doing this. That is, unless the government throws a fit. Which they probably will.
There is a big difference in downloading a script off google and double clicking it to take advantaged of flaws in the bnet0.2 to cheat someone out of pixel pts as opposed to reverse engineering the whole client/server relations and allowing people to play around the world lag free without even needing an internet connection.
lolwut? LAN =/= playing with someone around the world. The L in LAN stands for local. In a literal sense. Like two computers next to each other. Or maybe in the house over. Or maybe 300 feet away with ethernet cable. If you're playing around the world, it's not going to be lag free. And if you're playing around the world, you need an internet connection. I'm so confused by your statements. You say these things with such conviction, like you actually know what you're talking about. Please stop doing that.
And you do realize you can't hack something without knowing how it works first, right? This usually means reverse-engineering to get an understanding of it...
On July 06 2011 00:04 Spacedude wrote: Blizzard's model is questionable, though.
I know right? Selling lots of things for money is madness.
Better to give it away and hope real hard.
And hope real hard that they end up in your hands? :D
I think you misunderstond me somehow, though. I said there's nothing wrong with companies making lots of money (part of democracy, duh). It's how they do it that can be questioned, if anything. But I do understand people being frustrated with 'greedy companies', and it's kinda the companies own fault when they distence them from their costumer base.
On July 05 2011 12:20 Mauldo wrote: So the drop hackers are bad, but these hackers are good? They did the same thing, only you guys actually get to profit off of this with an illegal LAN.
It'll get shut down anyway, Blizzard is going to kick the shit out of whoever is doing this. That is, unless the government throws a fit. Which they probably will.
There is a big difference in downloading a script off google and double clicking it to take advantaged of flaws in the bnet0.2 to cheat someone out of pixel pts as opposed to reverse engineering the whole client/server relations and allowing people to play around the world lag free without even needing an internet connection.
lolwut? LAN =/= playing with someone around the world. The L in LAN stands for local. In a literal sense. Like two computers next to each other. Or maybe in the house over. Or maybe 300 feet away with ethernet cable. If you're playing around the world, it's not going to be lag free. And if you're playing around the world, you need an internet connection. I'm so confused by your statements. You say these things with such conviction, like you actually know what you're talking about. Please stop doing that.
And you do realize you can't hack something without knowing how it works first, right? This usually means reverse-engineering to get an understanding of it...
Pretty sure you misread. He says that people around the world can play lag free (locally).
It is my hope that this will rattle blizzard and they will implement their own LAN in order to stop the spread of this kind of thing. There must be some compromise that allows for offline LAN that must be online registered or some such. There is no room for denying us LAN outright anymore if this works they can loose a lot of money.
On July 05 2011 12:20 Mauldo wrote: So the drop hackers are bad, but these hackers are good? They did the same thing, only you guys actually get to profit off of this with an illegal LAN.
It'll get shut down anyway, Blizzard is going to kick the shit out of whoever is doing this. That is, unless the government throws a fit. Which they probably will.
There is a big difference in downloading a script off google and double clicking it to take advantaged of flaws in the bnet0.2 to cheat someone out of pixel pts as opposed to reverse engineering the whole client/server relations and allowing people to play around the world lag free without even needing an internet connection.
lolwut? LAN =/= playing with someone around the world. The L in LAN stands for local. In a literal sense. Like two computers next to each other. Or maybe in the house over. Or maybe 300 feet away with ethernet cable. If you're playing around the world, it's not going to be lag free. And if you're playing around the world, you need an internet connection. I'm so confused by your statements. You say these things with such conviction, like you actually know what you're talking about. Please stop doing that.
And you do realize you can't hack something without knowing how it works first, right? This usually means reverse-engineering to get an understanding of it...
Pretty sure you misread. He says that people around the world can play lag free (locally).
The only time this custom battle.net server will come relavent is when Blizzard stops caring about starcraft 2. This mayb a few years after the last expansion is released but at that time you will have an ICCUP similar ladder before that any orginization is going to be shutdown by blizzard or it will be hosted in a country where lag is an issue.
On July 05 2011 01:39 arb wrote: While this is a good thing for the community.. I dont think Blizzard will have any part of it
How is it even good for the community? It isn't LAN, it's just a custom server played over the peoples computers instead of BNET.
Yeah, and you can join this server over LAN.
I hope this thing spreads and evolves... Can't wait to play epic 4v4s and custom maps on my next LAN-party. Don't know why people keep talking about better latency and stuff... I think being able to play on a private LAN with your friends is what everyone misses
On July 05 2011 01:39 arb wrote: While this is a good thing for the community.. I dont think Blizzard will have any part of it
How is it even good for the community? It isn't LAN, it's just a custom server played over the peoples computers instead of BNET.
It can only support 4 players (for now) and is meant for LAN. It is a custom server, but I don't think that this will be the next iCCup (at least, not for a couple of years).
On July 05 2011 01:39 arb wrote: While this is a good thing for the community.. I dont think Blizzard will have any part of it
How is it even good for the community? It isn't LAN, it's just a custom server played over the peoples computers instead of BNET.
Yeah, and you can join this server over LAN.
I hope this thing spreads and evolves... Can't wait to play epic 4v4s and custom maps on my next LAN-party. Don't know why people keep talking about better latency and stuff... I think being able to play on a private LAN with your friends is what everyone misses
I know that I miss that the most (but the latency will help a whole bunch for tourneys)
On July 06 2011 00:04 Spacedude wrote: Blizzard's model is questionable, though.
I know right? Selling lots of things for money is madness.
Better to give it away and hope real hard.
putting LAN in starcraft is hardly giving it away
Actually, it would mean giving it away to some hundred thousand people
They could have put LAN in starcraft from the first... how would that be giving it away? People will pirate it (they already do), but that is not giving it away.
I am afraid if something like this becomes mainstream, and a whole bunch of people pirate the game, and stick to an ICCup and Garena type servers, then Blizzard will discontinue its support for Starcraft 2, maybe even indefinitely postpone the two promised expansions. This simply because with the client easily able to acquire through torrent, and adjustment with gateway settings, one could play SC2 for free.
Although, it would be nice to have a place to play when battle.net is down.
On July 06 2011 00:04 Spacedude wrote: Blizzard's model is questionable, though.
I know right? Selling lots of things for money is madness.
Better to give it away and hope real hard.
putting LAN in starcraft is hardly giving it away
Actually, it would mean giving it away to some hundred thousand people
They could have put LAN in starcraft from the first... how would that be giving it away? People will pirate it (they already do), but that is not giving it away.
people who try to pirate it quickly find out that they have to have an account with the game unlocked on it to play. So really, they download a Client version with nothing unlocked. Allowing a private server build for free would give people who have not yet bought SC2 the incentive of pirating a game and playing on the private servers. Blizzards model, they not only keep honest people honest, but they also find an effective way to reduce, even do away with entirely, loss due to piracy.
On July 05 2011 00:43 echO [W] wrote: They're going to get sued and shut down.
lol, good luck suing people in China. I hear they are very fond of property rights Besides, as far as I can see (without any links or whatever) it is a crack for the client. So since it is already in the wild they would have to go after individual users to prevent them from using it.
On July 06 2011 00:04 Spacedude wrote: Blizzard's model is questionable, though.
I know right? Selling lots of things for money is madness.
Better to give it away and hope real hard.
putting LAN in starcraft is hardly giving it away
Actually, it would mean giving it away to some hundred thousand people
They could have put LAN in starcraft from the first... how would that be giving it away? People will pirate it (they already do), but that is not giving it away.
exactly, and the majority of the people that pirate it probably wouldn't have bought it anyway
There are two groups of people that want LAN support. First are the pirates - they just want to play for free and i think we can all agree - thats wrong. Then there are the normal buyers + esports supporters. They want to have a game wich can be played in tournaments without the lag or have their friend come over for a some lan action. Problem is if blizzard puts in LAN the first group wins. You may think that there is some way to restrict LAN like the need of logging in to BNET etc but the truth is once blizzard puts in the code for LAN functionality into their game the crackers have a 95% of the work done.
Now that its already done i dont see ANY reason they would not release LAN on their own. Sure they might try to fight it for a while but once its done and distributed they cant do anything about it. Only thing left to do is to implement LAN for all their honest consumers. I dont see any other reason no to do it .... ?
This reminds me of the good old sc1 / wc3 days of FSGS server locating on google and wc3 warforge server finding. With IP's changing daily. It was quite fun because it was a community in itself, playing vs other pple who also worked hard to get onto that server, therefore creating a really friendly environment. Of course tournaments wont use it, however its great for private lans hush hush.
This could bring up some interesting legal questions. Many countries have laws that make the EULA void when you buy the game before agreeing to it. So an end user who bought the game and then connects to a private server wouldn't be liable. The people running the server would be however, that's clearly copyright infringement. However piracy is wide spread in China, dvds, music, games and even clothes. The government their doesn't seem to care. If a server is setup somewhere that doesn't recognize or enforce international copyright laws and the player is in a nation that voids the EULA. It will be very difficult for Blizzard to do anything.
Honestly, I think Blizzard brought this on because of their approach to SC2. Their ladder is a joke. It ranks people up more so on massing games than actual skill. I was de-ranking a bit, I lost 20+ games in a row, then I started playing again. I'm now top diamond and all of my opponents are gold. Passing other diamond players on ladder by smashing golds game after game is imo a perfect example of a broken ladder. The system "forcing" you to a 50% ratio is really bad too imo. When you get 30 points for a win and -5 for a loss, playing lots of games is more determinate of your ladder position than actual skill. Also, I've seen so many major tournaments (even the finals) get screwed up because of the necessity of a live connection.
I am only really surprised it took this long to happen. I payed money for the game, I should be able to play it how and where I want. I'm not bypassing any monthly fee, so what is blizzards deal with having to control me? Battlenet has tons of issues that should have been worked out before release anyway. I can't watch or share replays with others, "input limit reached", no do not disturb mode, people can drag me into chat channels against my will, lag, server segregation, and plenty more.
I still remember when the Chinese players asked Browder why rushes were so strong and safe in SC2 and he proceeded to troll them. "Rushes are both strong and safe? I've never heard that." was his response with a sly grin on his face. Then he says"Chinese players must have some special knowledge of the game that I don't have" I guess he was right all along, except it's the Chinese who are wearing the grin now.
On July 06 2011 01:29 whiteguycash wrote: people who try to pirate it quickly find out that they have to have an account with the game unlocked on it to play. So really, they download a Client version with nothing unlocked.
the reason people have pirated the game is for free single player. lots of people have pirated it just for that
On July 05 2011 17:20 KingofHearts wrote: blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
The reason that blizzard still exists as a company is BECAUSE they care about profit. Do you think Blizzard would have spent as much money and time making SC2 if they knew it could be played online with pirated versions (thus decreasing sales)? Of course not.
Companies who don't care about profit are generally end up bankrupt.
It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games.
You should hope that blizzard continues to care about profit, because the more profit blizzard makes, the more money they have to spend making great games.
Anyone else get the feeling that MLG, GSL etc are politely asking Blizzard if there is any way that they could use this in their tournaments? This would alleviate a lot of stress from tournament organizers and prevent a lot of big problems for them. LAN in SC2 is a dream come true for MLG, after what we have seen in some of their past events.
I don't follow this facetious "Blizzard is a charity?" stuff. You can't stuff enough DRM into a game to stop it being pirated. Since the Chinese have come up with cracked multiplayer anyway, the result is just that the product we got is worse. If putting LAN in makes them a charity, I can be just as hyperbolic and say no competent business would release a product that was marinated in canine diarrhea and lacked basic and standard features. Yet you defend it by virtue of its name only. So I don't think the problem is that Blizzard would be a bad company if they had taken a different route with LAN, etc., but that you're a bad consumer because feed money into a vacuum because you believe the fact that it's a business validates all its business practices as being refined and perfect. In reality it's run by people, who are fallible.
Even the BETA got cracked, blizz can't stop pirates from getting what they want. As well if an english LAN is released (blizz or not) I will use it because lag while playing a friend in the same room is a joke.
On July 06 2011 01:29 whiteguycash wrote: people who try to pirate it quickly find out that they have to have an account with the game unlocked on it to play. So really, they download a Client version with nothing unlocked.
the reason people have pirated the game is for free single player. lots of people have pirated it just for that
On July 06 2011 01:29 whiteguycash wrote: people who try to pirate it quickly find out that they have to have an account with the game unlocked on it to play. So really, they download a Client version with nothing unlocked.
the reason people have pirated the game is for free single player. lots of people have pirated it just for that
On July 06 2011 01:29 whiteguycash wrote: people who try to pirate it quickly find out that they have to have an account with the game unlocked on it to play. So really, they download a Client version with nothing unlocked.
the reason people have pirated the game is for free single player. lots of people have pirated it just for that
Glad to see this. I am 100% against any sort of walled garden crap. Especially when it prevents you from doing things like play the game you paid for on certain days of the week, or with lan latency when players are on the same lan, playing against friends in different regions, etc.
On July 06 2011 05:14 artanis2 wrote: Glad to see this. I am 100% against any sort of walled garden crap. Especially when it prevents you from doing things like play the game you paid for on certain days of the week, or with lan latency when players are on the same lan, playing against friends in different regions, etc.
I agree. It was so frustrating when games would lag/drop when my brother was 2 feet away from me!
On July 05 2011 17:20 KingofHearts wrote: blizzard isnt thinking for us customers and fans when they didnt implement LAN, they're thinking about their own profit. i hope some new company overtake them.
The reason that blizzard still exists as a company is BECAUSE they care about profit. Do you think Blizzard would have spent as much money and time making SC2 if they knew it could be played online with pirated versions (thus decreasing sales)? Of course not.
Companies who don't care about profit are generally end up bankrupt.
It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games.
You should hope that blizzard continues to care about profit, because the more profit blizzard makes, the more money they have to spend making great games.
Valve games have LAN. Valve isn't bankrupt due to piracy. Valve makes enough profit to buy out dev teams and project licenses, while still being able to appeal to shareholders. Seems like they're doing fine to me.
Blizzard won't up and dissapear if SC2 gets pirated a little. All of their old games got pirated, there's hundreds of thousands of people who play on WoW private servers, and they (as a company) are still going on strong. Hell, SC2 already got pirated a bunch of times on release, anyway. Adding LAN =! not caring about profit. Adding LAN, however, does = caring about quality competition and caring about your fanbase.
Yeah, it seems that the lack of LAN is nothing but a gesture to calm down the stockholders that doesn't actually make much practical sense. It's a bad trade-off, imo. It only goes to alienates the customers more than anything else.
The removal of LAN is about these things in the following order: "Consolidation of intellectual property", "licensing of StarCraft professional gaming scene", "software piracy". There is lots and lots of money to be made by gradually tethering all Blizzard products into a central service and claiming your intellectual property rights are being violated when any modification of the game occurs. See: The price of downloadable content (user-made or company-made) after XBox Live became popular.
You are ofcourse right about these things you listed here.
It's very, very scary to me how little control we as users will have left if this trend continues grow and expand.
Well, I guess there needs to be a concerted effort to educate people on the topic. However, it's quite difficult to do that when people still believe Blizzard got rid of the Local Area Network function because a bunch of kids in Vietnam who are lucky to see 100 dollars a month managed to download the game off the internet. It's an uphill battle.
I do believe you make a strong point there. I never doubted that it all comes down to control, though, as I have stated in some of my other posts (not in this thread). But it's understandable that we tend to focus on LAN as that's what's close to us. I do hope most people can see the bigger picture than not - and care about it.
It's such a tough call, though: How many people on this forums currently have their livelihood built around this model? If you attack the model, you're attacking the personalities and the players that make their money off of it. That's a very tough decision to make.
"It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games."
And that is why you have to punish the people who actually buy it?
You guys think that if sc2 had LAN, no one would buy the game, because everyone would play on cracked servers etc. So why would you think that? Because the Bnet we paid for is shitty as hell and restricts the user in every possible way. Why does Blizz not create an infrastructure which is worth paying for?
I know a lot of multiplayer games you can play on cracked servers with a pirated copy, and on your private LAN, of course. Why do these games still exist? Why did the producers even sell more tham 20 copies of it, as it was pirated right at the release date? I hope you Blizz-Fanboys are smart enough to find the answers yourself.
On July 06 2011 06:33 kekstier wrote: "It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games."
And that is why you have to punish the people who actually buy it?
You guys think that if sc2 had LAN, no one would buy the game, because everyone would play on cracked servers etc. So why would you think that? Because the Bnet we paid for is shitty as hell and restricts the user in every possible way. Why does Blizz not create an infrastructure which is worth paying for?
I know a lot of multiplayer games you can play on cracked servers with a pirated copy, and on your private LAN, of course. Why do these games still exist? Why did the producers even sell more tham 20 copies of it, as it was pirated right at the release date? I hope you Blizz-Fanboys are smart enough to find the answers yourself.
I agree, while pirates are bad, that is no reason to punish your whole user-base by not implementing LAN.
On July 05 2011 12:20 Mauldo wrote: So the drop hackers are bad, but these hackers are good? They did the same thing, only you guys actually get to profit off of this with an illegal LAN.
It'll get shut down anyway, Blizzard is going to kick the shit out of whoever is doing this. That is, unless the government throws a fit. Which they probably will.
There is a big difference in downloading a script off google and double clicking it to take advantaged of flaws in the bnet0.2 to cheat someone out of pixel pts as opposed to reverse engineering the whole client/server relations and allowing people to play around the world lag free without even needing an internet connection.
That doesn't change a thing. They worked harder to break the law, so it's okay now?
This is illegal. Running this is the very definition of the word. It doesn't matter if Blizzard's BattleNet was nothing but a shittier version of AIM. Running this is illegal, and developing this is grounds of a multi-million dollar lawsuit on top of a prison sentence.
And yet, it's okay because it helps you guys. Everyone in the thread acknowledges that it's illegal or at least against the Terms and Conditions, but they don't care. They blame Blizzard for them breaking the law.
If any of you went into the Hack thread and pushed for Blizzard to sue the developer of the hack and ban the users and fix the loophole, and then came in here and lauded the Chinese developers of this, then you're trying to have your cake and eat it to. Either both hacks are okay, or none are.
On July 05 2011 12:20 Mauldo wrote: So the drop hackers are bad, but these hackers are good? They did the same thing, only you guys actually get to profit off of this with an illegal LAN.
It'll get shut down anyway, Blizzard is going to kick the shit out of whoever is doing this. That is, unless the government throws a fit. Which they probably will.
There is a big difference in downloading a script off google and double clicking it to take advantaged of flaws in the bnet0.2 to cheat someone out of pixel pts as opposed to reverse engineering the whole client/server relations and allowing people to play around the world lag free without even needing an internet connection.
That doesn't change a thing. They worked harder to break the law, so it's okay now?
This is illegal. Running this is the very definition of the word. It doesn't matter if Blizzard's BattleNet was nothing but a shittier version of AIM. Running this is illegal, and developing this is grounds of a multi-million dollar lawsuit on top of a prison sentence.
And yet, it's okay because it helps you guys. Everyone in the thread acknowledges that it's illegal or at least against the Terms and Conditions, but they don't care. They blame Blizzard for them breaking the law.
If any of you went into the Hack thread and pushed for Blizzard to sue the developer of the hack and ban the users and fix the loophole, and then came in here and lauded the Chinese developers of this, then you're trying to have your cake and eat it to. Either both hacks are okay, or none are.
You are going overboard on your zeal for punishment and comparing apples and oranges. The focus isn't that it takes more effort, it's that it does far more good. It would also be wasteful for anyone to advocate Blizzard suing everyone who comes up with a maphack. But we only have one ladder and one battle.net (thanks to related Blizzard decisions), so it's in all our interests that the ladder be clean, fair, and secure.
About the Chinese crack: Its legality isn't equivalent to whether it's right or not. Even if you think it's wrong, it should be obvious that a maphack used on Battle.net and a crack that offers better latency are drastically different things. Hacking with a maphack and hacking SC2 multiplayer are synonymous in the same way that shooting a gun and shooting a basketball are the same action.
On July 06 2011 06:33 kekstier wrote: "It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games."
And that is why you have to punish the people who actually buy it?
You guys think that if sc2 had LAN, no one would buy the game, because everyone would play on cracked servers etc. So why would you think that? Because the Bnet we paid for is shitty as hell and restricts the user in every possible way. Why does Blizz not create an infrastructure which is worth paying for?
I know a lot of multiplayer games you can play on cracked servers with a pirated copy, and on your private LAN, of course. Why do these games still exist? Why did the producers even sell more tham 20 copies of it, as it was pirated right at the release date? I hope you Blizz-Fanboys are smart enough to find the answers yourself.
I'd also like an answer to why blizzard bothers creating a single player campaign when that was easily pirated and probably cost a lot of money to make. Why does any company make a single player game they are all pirated? Sounds like they are all charities giving things away for free right?
On July 06 2011 06:33 kekstier wrote: "It's not blizzard's fault we don't have LAN, it's the fault of people who crack and download pirated games."
And that is why you have to punish the people who actually buy it?
You guys think that if sc2 had LAN, no one would buy the game, because everyone would play on cracked servers etc. So why would you think that? Because the Bnet we paid for is shitty as hell and restricts the user in every possible way. Why does Blizz not create an infrastructure which is worth paying for?
I know a lot of multiplayer games you can play on cracked servers with a pirated copy, and on your private LAN, of course. Why do these games still exist? Why did the producers even sell more tham 20 copies of it, as it was pirated right at the release date? I hope you Blizz-Fanboys are smart enough to find the answers yourself.
I'd also like an answer to why blizzard bothers creating a single player campaign when that was easily pirated and probably cost a lot of money to make. Why does any company make a single player game they are all pirated? Sounds like they are all charities giving things away for free right?
On July 05 2011 12:20 Mauldo wrote: So the drop hackers are bad, but these hackers are good? They did the same thing, only you guys actually get to profit off of this with an illegal LAN.
It'll get shut down anyway, Blizzard is going to kick the shit out of whoever is doing this. That is, unless the government throws a fit. Which they probably will.
There is a big difference in downloading a script off google and double clicking it to take advantaged of flaws in the bnet0.2 to cheat someone out of pixel pts as opposed to reverse engineering the whole client/server relations and allowing people to play around the world lag free without even needing an internet connection.
This is illegal. Running this is the very definition of the word. It doesn't matter if Blizzard's BattleNet was nothing but a shittier version of AIM. Running this is illegal, and developing this is grounds of a multi-million dollar lawsuit on top of a prison sentence.
Sounds like you want to ruin these hackers life? It's perfectic, and how is that justice, exactly?
On July 05 2011 02:49 opisska wrote: How is this against the ToS, when these Terms fo Service are for using Battle.net?. The whole point of this mod is not to use Battle.net. Ergo, ToS do not apply. yay!
I know that this is more complex and that in some law systems it is much more dangerous than in others, but saying that it is outright illegal is way too much ass-climbing. Given that TL is hosted in the US, its understandable they don't want even to link to this, because - well they are in a very special law system, aren't they? But in some other countries, I can see tournaments running on this, much as playing BW on LAN. And we may be suprirised even in the US - look at what happened around iphone jalibreaking!
I am 100% happy about this, we need every single bit of evidence that the resistence of software makers is futile, that every "anti-piracy" measure they take will turn against them in the long run. The fact that we have to play through crappy Battle.net, because some managers are stupid enough to believe that it actualy helps them in makeing profit, is outrageous.
No, this is 100% illegal, if anything they are infringing on Blizzard's intellectual property copyrights with the server-code they are distributing. Also there will 100% be a some paragraph in the ToS that talks about hosting a private server that allows people to play Starcraft2(TM)
The program emulates a server's packets, the serve source was never discovered or leaked. It is just modifying the SC2 client just a bit as far as I understand (change server), most of it is an emulator, which is a separate program made from scratch,
On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote: Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's.
You don't understand how the system works if you don't think it will help. I won't miraculously help everything dramatically; it won't help those who have bad connections with each other in the first place, but it will still help even them. The packets no longer have to be routed through a 3rd party which takes additional time. This allows very low latencies between people with good connections, and proportionally-as-good latencies between people with worse connections — no more forced latencies, or 3rd party extra delay.
Regarding matchmaking it is possible, but the emulation tech isn't there yet. Blizzard's server is good yes, but the guy's point specifically mentioned reasons why Blizzard's wasn't perfect... you just ignored that?
On July 06 2011 09:07 StuBob wrote: I own sc2, so I should be able to play with my brother (who also owns sc2) 2 feet away from me, when bnet is down/ our internet isn't working....
this makes it so.
Do you live in some 3rd world country? I can't remember the last time my internet was out because of my cable provider.
However, go Chinese... It would be nice if this led to some kind of global, singular ladder with decent maps and a win loss record for all. Which won't happen.
Or maybe I'd like my forcefields to go down when I tell them to go down. Kthx.
Minimum latency I get is 200ms because I live in Australia. This sucks for Aus tourneys, having lag even though the person you are playing is sitting opposite you.
On July 06 2011 09:07 StuBob wrote: I own sc2, so I should be able to play with my brother (who also owns sc2) 2 feet away from me, when bnet is down/ our internet isn't working....
this makes it so.
Do you live in some 3rd world country? I can't remember the last time my internet was out because of my cable provider.
However, go Chinese... It would be nice if this led to some kind of global, singular ladder with decent maps and a win loss record for all. Which won't happen.
It requires a third world country to have bad internet now? I had no idea Australia was third world until you opened my eyes
I hope this encourages blizzard to just add lan, now that it's been cracked anyway they might as well
On July 06 2011 09:07 StuBob wrote: I own sc2, so I should be able to play with my brother (who also owns sc2) 2 feet away from me, when bnet is down/ our internet isn't working....
this makes it so.
Do you live in some 3rd world country? I can't remember the last time my internet was out because of my cable provider.
However, go Chinese... It would be nice if this led to some kind of global, singular ladder with decent maps and a win loss record for all. Which won't happen.
Unreliable internet is a horrible thing witch plagues many families, even in the United States...
On July 05 2011 12:20 Mauldo wrote: So the drop hackers are bad, but these hackers are good? They did the same thing, only you guys actually get to profit off of this with an illegal LAN.
It'll get shut down anyway, Blizzard is going to kick the shit out of whoever is doing this. That is, unless the government throws a fit. Which they probably will.
There is a big difference in downloading a script off google and double clicking it to take advantaged of flaws in the bnet0.2 to cheat someone out of pixel pts as opposed to reverse engineering the whole client/server relations and allowing people to play around the world lag free without even needing an internet connection.
That doesn't change a thing. They worked harder to break the law, so it's okay now?
This is illegal. Running this is the very definition of the word. It doesn't matter if Blizzard's BattleNet was nothing but a shittier version of AIM. Running this is illegal, and developing this is grounds of a multi-million dollar lawsuit on top of a prison sentence.
And yet, it's okay because it helps you guys. Everyone in the thread acknowledges that it's illegal or at least against the Terms and Conditions, but they don't care. They blame Blizzard for them breaking the law.
If any of you went into the Hack thread and pushed for Blizzard to sue the developer of the hack and ban the users and fix the loophole, and then came in here and lauded the Chinese developers of this, then you're trying to have your cake and eat it to. Either both hacks are okay, or none are.
You white knights are adorable, and this isn't even a girl blog!
This is just technology development, let's just wait and see what happens. The biggest effect things like this usually have is incentivization. This puts the ball in Blizzard's court, I'm very curious to see where this goes.
On July 06 2011 23:40 See.Blue wrote: This is just technology development, let's just wait and see what happens. The biggest effect things like this usually have is incentivization. This puts the ball in Blizzard's court, I'm very curious to see where this goes.
I agree. If blizz doesn't do anything then we will get lan ^.^ If blizz does something (presumably add lan) we will get lan ^.^
On July 06 2011 23:40 See.Blue wrote: This is just technology development, let's just wait and see what happens. The biggest effect things like this usually have is incentivization. This puts the ball in Blizzard's court, I'm very curious to see where this goes.
I agree. If blizz doesn't do anything then we will get lan ^.^ If blizz does something (presumably add lan) we will get lan ^.^
I am excited, lol.
They could just threaten lawsuits against everyone using it in America.
Everyone seems to be talking about the effect this has on esports and laddering, but tbh i'm most excited for actually using it at LANs. 8-20 people sharing a connection to bnet just to play the game they all bought is pretty godawful.
On July 05 2011 12:20 Mauldo wrote: So the drop hackers are bad, but these hackers are good? They did the same thing, only you guys actually get to profit off of this with an illegal LAN.
It'll get shut down anyway, Blizzard is going to kick the shit out of whoever is doing this. That is, unless the government throws a fit. Which they probably will.
There is a big difference in downloading a script off google and double clicking it to take advantaged of flaws in the bnet0.2 to cheat someone out of pixel pts as opposed to reverse engineering the whole client/server relations and allowing people to play around the world lag free without even needing an internet connection.
That doesn't change a thing. They worked harder to break the law, so it's okay now?
This is illegal. Running this is the very definition of the word. It doesn't matter if Blizzard's BattleNet was nothing but a shittier version of AIM. Running this is illegal, and developing this is grounds of a multi-million dollar lawsuit on top of a prison sentence.
And yet, it's okay because it helps you guys. Everyone in the thread acknowledges that it's illegal or at least against the Terms and Conditions, but they don't care. They blame Blizzard for them breaking the law.
If any of you went into the Hack thread and pushed for Blizzard to sue the developer of the hack and ban the users and fix the loophole, and then came in here and lauded the Chinese developers of this, then you're trying to have your cake and eat it to. Either both hacks are okay, or none are.
Because morality and law are the same!
It is immoral though. Whether or not you have legally purchased the game, and I assume you have, by supporting the pirate communities you are legitimizing a means of theft. The net result of LAN mode is mass, uncontrolled, piracy over Garena and similar platforms. Piracy is the reason PC games are dying, they cant make any money to make more games when people constantly steal them with little to no effort. Nobody in their right mind would add LAN support because of this.
I see this as a step in the right direction. Maybe not the best way to go about it, but it's on it's way there. Every RTS needs some form of LAN capability, otherwise it can never truly be called an esport, as it can't be played at the highest possible level.
I would also like to note, for the less intelligent, that there is technically nothing illegal about this. It's main purpose is for LAN-like latency. It's just like jailbreaking an iPhone. Yeah, it can be used for piracy if you want, but that doesn't make jailbreaking illegal. If you payed money for a product, you OWN it, and can, for the most part, do what you wish with it.
On July 06 2011 23:40 See.Blue wrote: This is just technology development, let's just wait and see what happens. The biggest effect things like this usually have is incentivization. This puts the ball in Blizzard's court, I'm very curious to see where this goes.
I agree. If blizz doesn't do anything then we will get lan ^.^ If blizz does something (presumably add lan) we will get lan ^.^
I am excited, lol.
They could just threaten lawsuits against everyone using it in America.
Lucky I'm in Australia!
I doubt that the FBI is going to hunt down people using a crack for LAN
On July 06 2011 23:40 See.Blue wrote: This is just technology development, let's just wait and see what happens. The biggest effect things like this usually have is incentivization. This puts the ball in Blizzard's court, I'm very curious to see where this goes.
I agree. If blizz doesn't do anything then we will get lan ^.^ If blizz does something (presumably add lan) we will get lan ^.^
I am excited, lol.
They could just threaten lawsuits against everyone using it in America.
Lucky I'm in Australia!
I doubt that the FBI is going to hunt down people using a crack for LAN
Especially, if there's no way to find that out, lol.
On July 06 2011 23:40 See.Blue wrote: This is just technology development, let's just wait and see what happens. The biggest effect things like this usually have is incentivization. This puts the ball in Blizzard's court, I'm very curious to see where this goes.
I agree. If blizz doesn't do anything then we will get lan ^.^ If blizz does something (presumably add lan) we will get lan ^.^
I am excited, lol.
They could just threaten lawsuits against everyone using it in America.
Lucky I'm in Australia!
I doubt that the FBI is going to hunt down people using a crack for LAN
Especially, if there's no way to find that out, lol.
Yeah I was going to say,but have been kinda beaten to it:
Not only does Blizzard not have the power to sue so many people for something that's difficult to prove, but they would have no way of knowing. Not even the most powerful organizations in the country (or world) such as the FBI would have access to the information of what software is running on a typical user's PC.
On July 06 2011 23:40 See.Blue wrote: This is just technology development, let's just wait and see what happens. The biggest effect things like this usually have is incentivization. This puts the ball in Blizzard's court, I'm very curious to see where this goes.
I agree. If blizz doesn't do anything then we will get lan ^.^ If blizz does something (presumably add lan) we will get lan ^.^
I am excited, lol.
They could just threaten lawsuits against everyone using it in America.
Lucky I'm in Australia!
I doubt that the FBI is going to hunt down people using a crack for LAN
Especially, if there's no way to find that out, lol.
Yeah I was going to say,but have been kinda beaten to it:
Not only does Blizzard not have the power to sue so many people for something that's difficult to prove, but they would have no way of knowing. Not even the most powerful organizations in the country (or world) such as the FBI would have access to the information of what software is running on a typical user's PC.
Actually... it's pretty simple, they find out the ip addresses of every person who downloaded the crack, trace it, and you have your address. They probably won't sue every person as it would take up too much money to do so, but they probably would take some sort of action.
On July 06 2011 23:40 See.Blue wrote: This is just technology development, let's just wait and see what happens. The biggest effect things like this usually have is incentivization. This puts the ball in Blizzard's court, I'm very curious to see where this goes.
I agree. If blizz doesn't do anything then we will get lan ^.^ If blizz does something (presumably add lan) we will get lan ^.^
I am excited, lol.
They could just threaten lawsuits against everyone using it in America.
Lucky I'm in Australia!
I doubt that the FBI is going to hunt down people using a crack for LAN
Especially, if there's no way to find that out, lol.
Yeah I was going to say,but have been kinda beaten to it:
Not only does Blizzard not have the power to sue so many people for something that's difficult to prove, but they would have no way of knowing. Not even the most powerful organizations in the country (or world) such as the FBI would have access to the information of what software is running on a typical user's PC.
Actually... it's pretty simple, they find out the ip addresses of every person who downloaded the crack, trace it, and you have your address. They probably won't sue every person as it would take up too much money to do so, but they probably would take some sort of action.
Recent court case in the united states ruled that an IP address is not sufficient evidence to prove someone did something.
On July 07 2011 05:24 Xapti wrote: Not only does Blizzard not have the power to sue so many people for something that's difficult to prove, but they would have no way of knowing. Not even the most powerful organizations in the country (or world) such as the FBI would have access to the information of what software is running on a typical user's PC.
Actually... it's pretty simple, they find out the ip addresses of every person who downloaded the crack, trace it, and you have your address. They probably won't sue every person as it would take up too much money to do so, but they probably would take some sort of action.
That only works on traceable download sources (as opposed to private servers,secured bittorrent, e-mail, CD/DVD/USB, IRC/MSN/AIM/Y!M DCC, LAN, etc.). It also doesn't indicate that they used the crack, so they would just be charged for having a copy of the game (which is a common problem anyway). It also wouldn't indicate which person at the IP's location downloaded and/or used it (WIFI, multiple-person households). Edit: damn got beaten to again
On a side note: English version of the Chinese LAN client seems to be operational now. The Chinese data files were switched to English. It will still be a while before NA/EU client is modded.
On July 06 2011 23:40 See.Blue wrote: This is just technology development, let's just wait and see what happens. The biggest effect things like this usually have is incentivization. This puts the ball in Blizzard's court, I'm very curious to see where this goes.
I agree. If blizz doesn't do anything then we will get lan ^.^ If blizz does something (presumably add lan) we will get lan ^.^
I am excited, lol.
They could just threaten lawsuits against everyone using it in America.
Lucky I'm in Australia!
I doubt that the FBI is going to hunt down people using a crack for LAN
Especially, if there's no way to find that out, lol.
Yeah I was going to say,but have been kinda beaten to it:
Not only does Blizzard not have the power to sue so many people for something that's difficult to prove, but they would have no way of knowing. Not even the most powerful organizations in the country (or world) such as the FBI would have access to the information of what software is running on a typical user's PC.
Actually... it's pretty simple, they find out the ip addresses of every person who downloaded the crack, trace it, and you have your address. They probably won't sue every person as it would take up too much money to do so, but they probably would take some sort of action.
Nobody is getting sued for downloading and using this 'hack'. It's not even illegal. There's laws such as the Bills of Rights and equivalent that states that you can modify what you own (the game files is your copy). The TOS means nothing here.
Also, just because you download something doesn't mean you even know what it is or that you're going to use it. It could even be a person that hacked into your wireless that actually did it. There's way too many complication invovled here, so it's simply not that simple a thing.
On July 05 2011 12:20 Mauldo wrote: So the drop hackers are bad, but these hackers are good? They did the same thing, only you guys actually get to profit off of this with an illegal LAN.
It'll get shut down anyway, Blizzard is going to kick the shit out of whoever is doing this. That is, unless the government throws a fit. Which they probably will.
There is a big difference in downloading a script off google and double clicking it to take advantaged of flaws in the bnet0.2 to cheat someone out of pixel pts as opposed to reverse engineering the whole client/server relations and allowing people to play around the world lag free without even needing an internet connection.
That doesn't change a thing. They worked harder to break the law, so it's okay now?
This is illegal. Running this is the very definition of the word. It doesn't matter if Blizzard's BattleNet was nothing but a shittier version of AIM. Running this is illegal, and developing this is grounds of a multi-million dollar lawsuit on top of a prison sentence.
And yet, it's okay because it helps you guys. Everyone in the thread acknowledges that it's illegal or at least against the Terms and Conditions, but they don't care. They blame Blizzard for them breaking the law.
If any of you went into the Hack thread and pushed for Blizzard to sue the developer of the hack and ban the users and fix the loophole, and then came in here and lauded the Chinese developers of this, then you're trying to have your cake and eat it to. Either both hacks are okay, or none are.
Anyone with half a brain can tell that modding in a basic feature that was included in sc1 in 1998 but intentionally left out of sc2 because Blizzard thought they could make more money by screwing over their legitimate customers is different from drop hacking.
On July 06 2011 23:40 See.Blue wrote: This is just technology development, let's just wait and see what happens. The biggest effect things like this usually have is incentivization. This puts the ball in Blizzard's court, I'm very curious to see where this goes.
I agree. If blizz doesn't do anything then we will get lan ^.^ If blizz does something (presumably add lan) we will get lan ^.^
I am excited, lol.
They could just threaten lawsuits against everyone using it in America.
Adding official lan:
(Cost of) developing LAN
enthusiasm from legit players and tournament venues
possibility to play internationally (cross-server) over virtual networks? Would decrease sales
less incentive to get unofficial version
Not adding official lan:
Pay lawyers internationally to go against people who actually like their game.
Fight hosts for illegit servers/hosts - seems uncontrollable
Keep lag and a certain amount of risk for tourneys
If using the cracked versions is easy enough, they will get popular fast. Seeing how Blizzard doesn't make money off starcraft2 other than initial purchase (and maybe licensing for tournaments?) I find it hard to imagine which the most profitable solution for them is. Also I'm curious what difference Heart of the Swarm will have to multiplayer- split servers, classic (for those who don't buy it) and post-expansion? Not licensing the GSL for example to use SC2 before-patch, if they dislike multiplayer changes of HotS, might popularise cracked versions a lot.
On July 06 2011 23:40 See.Blue wrote: This is just technology development, let's just wait and see what happens. The biggest effect things like this usually have is incentivization. This puts the ball in Blizzard's court, I'm very curious to see where this goes.
I agree. If blizz doesn't do anything then we will get lan ^.^ If blizz does something (presumably add lan) we will get lan ^.^
I am excited, lol.
They could just threaten lawsuits against everyone using it in America.
Lucky I'm in Australia!
I doubt that the FBI is going to hunt down people using a crack for LAN
Especially, if there's no way to find that out, lol.
Yeah I was going to say,but have been kinda beaten to it:
Not only does Blizzard not have the power to sue so many people for something that's difficult to prove, but they would have no way of knowing. Not even the most powerful organizations in the country (or world) such as the FBI would have access to the information of what software is running on a typical user's PC.
Actually... it's pretty simple, they find out the ip addresses of every person who downloaded the crack, trace it, and you have your address. They probably won't sue every person as it would take up too much money to do so, but they probably would take some sort of action.
Even then, it's almost impossible to prove an IP address is a person in court. It has happened but most of the time it's thrown out.
So it looks like one person serves as both a client and the server while the other person is just a client. Does the person who is hosting then have an inherent lag advantage or no? I only skimmed through most of the thread, so sorry if this has been asked.
On July 05 2011 12:20 Mauldo wrote: So the drop hackers are bad, but these hackers are good? They did the same thing, only you guys actually get to profit off of this with an illegal LAN.
Players' goal is to have fun. Companies' goal is to get money. A good company might even think about maximising the "fun-to-be-had" as well as profit.
Players break the rules and play illegit LAN for the sake of fun. Blizzard downgrade from SC1 with no LAN to make it hardest possible to crack the multiplayer aka sell most official versions possible. Drop hackers break the rules because they can - doesn't help anybody. It's like you're putting an equal sign between Robin Hood and Hannibal Lecter.
Mauldo wrote: That doesn't change a thing. They worked harder to break the law, so it's okay now?
This is illegal. Running this is the very definition of the word. It doesn't matter if Blizzard's BattleNet was nothing but a shittier version of AIM. Running this is illegal, and developing this is grounds of a multi-million dollar lawsuit on top of a prison sentence.
There's more important software being cracked for which hackers don't get sued or imprisoned because they're smart enough to stay anonymous. Ever heard about an OS-cracker go to jail? Running this is as risky as any other shady software you might happen to have, with a minuscule risk to get your official Bnet account banned. Unless you're trying to run a big-ass tournament to get money for yourself you won't get in trouble. If you were implying morality, it's a matter of popularity. If everybody plays the fake version with the better features it's not "illegal" to your conscience - just like torrenting.
On July 10 2011 09:03 waxypants wrote: So it looks like one person serves as both a client and the server while the other person is just a client. Does the person who is hosting then have an inherent lag advantage or no? I only skimmed through most of the thread, so sorry if this has been asked.
If the point is to have LAN, then it doesn't really make much of a difference since you'll both have insignificant latency compared to going through the interwebs.
I don't know why they don't make it where you log on to their server, then once you're logged in, go to the "tournament" tab (which they'd add) and authenticate to a "tournament server" which would be officially put together and licensed by blizzard. Problem solved.
We released the English modification to Starfriend. --mod edit--
Enjoy your LAN Parties
.
Even though I support what your doing, you should really keep links out of the thread, otherwise its just gonna get shut down. The purpose of the thread is to share the knowledge that something like this is out there, but thats something they would have to figure out.
On July 11 2011 09:49 stormchaser wrote: Wow so someone's finally done it.
Yes. And the thing is that if they can EMULATE servers, the thing is that they can make ladder just like blizzard did. SO I HOPE they have some money and they can support payments for online servers and we will see something pretty soon :D
On July 11 2011 09:56 DirtYLOu wrote: And the thing is that if they can EMULATE servers, they can make ladder just like blizzard did. I HOPE they have some money and they can support payments for online servers and we will see something pretty soon :D
That's quite a ways away from happening AFAIK since it only handles lobby and game connections right now, not anything else like achievements, ladder, etc.
On July 11 2011 09:29 Myst wrote: released the English modification to Starfriend.
To clairify, this is english mod of TW client (like I said before), not an actual NA/EU client version (although when one mods enough stuff I'd kinda wonder what the difference would be).
On July 11 2011 09:56 DirtYLOu wrote: And the thing is that if they can EMULATE servers, they can make ladder just like blizzard did. I HOPE they have some money and they can support payments for online servers and we will see something pretty soon :D
That's quite a ways away from happening AFAIK since it only handles lobby and game connections right now, not anything else like achievements, ladder, etc.
On July 11 2011 09:29 Myst wrote: released the English modification to Starfriend.
To clairify, this is english mod of TW client (like I said before), not an actual NA/EU client version (although when one mods enough stuff I'd kinda wonder what the difference would be).
FFS, for what you need achievements for? They make ladder working and half of the scene i can asure u gonna play there.
I have no respect for people who blatantly steal the work of other. I dont care if they make .20 cents an hour, they should be thrown in jail because they are DIRTy piRATES!!! I dont care what the context is,, stealinh is ALways wrong!!
On July 11 2011 12:53 Serpico wrote: Might as well just put in LAN, Blizzard.
Dont you mean, might as well give every thief and criminal im the whole wide world the ability to blatantly steal your game?
Honestly, if you think blizzard are obligated to give LAN to the community you are an immature idiot who has never produced anything of worth.
I urge you socially inept degenerates to consider Blizzards situation for one second. They spent years investing money and effort into this game. They have every right to make as much money off this as possible because SC2 is freakin awesome. The attitudes expressed in this thread make me feel sick lol.
Ah man that was harsh. Why cant we all just get along and respect each other and not steal man. Peace and love and respect man. Im drunk man...
On July 11 2011 12:53 Serpico wrote: Might as well just put in LAN, Blizzard.
Dont you mean, might as well give every thief and criminal im the whole wide world the ability to blatantly steal your game?
Honestly, if you think blizzard are obligated to give LAN to the community you are an immature idiot who has never produced anything of worth.
I urge you socially inept degenerates to consider Blizzards situation for one second. They spent years investing money and effort into this game. They have every right to make as much money off this as possible because SC2 is freakin awesome. The attitudes expressed in this thread make me feel sick lol.
Ah man that was harsh. Why cant we all just get along and respect each other and not steal man. Peace and love and respect man. Im drunk man...
As customers and players of the game, we also have the right to expect something higher and to point out the flaws. Oh and that last paragraph about being too harsh: instead of writing it why don't you not be harsh in the first place? Socially inept degenerates? Do you even understand what you just said? How can you so critically insult so many people without considering THEIR situation for one second?
Actually as customers we can argue for better quality, however, it does not mean that blizzard does have to listen. I think what iNcontrol said was a good idea. Make all the sales, and then after a year or so, then implement LAN. Seriously, you can't argue with this logic. No person who loves starcraft will be cheap enough to wait a whole year + to get Starcarft 2.
So because people want LAN which cuts Blizzards income a bit you think those individuals are "socially inept degenerates"? lol Damn dude probably shouldn't post when your drunk if that's the kinda attitude you have, pretty rude. :/
On July 11 2011 12:53 Serpico wrote: Might as well just put in LAN, Blizzard.
Dont you mean, might as well give every thief and criminal im the whole wide world the ability to blatantly steal your game?
Honestly, if you think blizzard are obligated to give LAN to the community you are an immature idiot who has never produced anything of worth.
I urge you socially inept degenerates to consider Blizzards situation for one second. They spent years investing money and effort into this game. They have every right to make as much money off this as possible because SC2 is freakin awesome. The attitudes expressed in this thread make me feel sick lol.
Ah man that was harsh. Why cant we all just get along and respect each other and not steal man. Peace and love and respect man. Im drunk man...
So you approve of companies, which worsen their product for profit?
I think it's OK to have this crack. SC2 was released almost 1 year ago. People who could buy the game, already bought it. And people with money will buy licensed SC2 anyway , the difference between cracked and original game is too big at the moment.
I really enjoy the game, but i would like it more if: -- i could play off-race(without droping or buying another damn account) -- plays in multiple regions(i actually plays on na and la(my homeland), na cuz i want more competitive play and la cuz my friends is in there) -- lan-party with friends -- no 200ms main lag
sorry blizz, but sounds cool
and it may be good to blizz too, people that play the cracked version and likes tend to buy the licensed IMO
On July 11 2011 12:53 Serpico wrote: Might as well just put in LAN, Blizzard.
Dont you mean, might as well give every thief and criminal im the whole wide world the ability to blatantly steal your game?
Honestly, if you think blizzard are obligated to give LAN to the community you are an immature idiot who has never produced anything of worth.
I urge you socially inept degenerates to consider Blizzards situation for one second. They spent years investing money and effort into this game. They have every right to make as much money off this as possible because SC2 is freakin awesome. The attitudes expressed in this thread make me feel sick lol.
Ah man that was harsh. Why cant we all just get along and respect each other and not steal man. Peace and love and respect man. Im drunk man...
Battle.net 2.0 has to do with intellectual property rights. Battle.net 2.0 was only designed to stop software piracy because it acts as a circumvention measure for those intellectual property rights. Not because a bunch of fourteen-year-olds in Vietnam would have a chance to play the game free of charge.
On July 11 2011 14:52 Fir3fly wrote: i see this as "well, battle net is fucked now. chinese have a copy of it. MAY ASWEL PUT IN LAN"
i mean, wasnt the whole point of keeping lan out is so that this doesnt happen?
Or they can take legal action and shut down the Chinese hack server.
It's not like they have to give up entirely just because they encountered one obstacle.
You do realize its not a server that the hacks hosted on but from your own pc, which is how most LAN hacks for games are.
Depending on how it works. I can't imagine that anything like ladder would work when you host the games on your machine. This would mean u could just play custom games which u are the host from.(bad connection, bad latency for everyone)
Or there are servers which emulate the blizz servers (like in CoD4 just on a bigger scale) to which you connect via your hacked client.
A possible Third would be some virtual network (Hamachi, Tunnel etc.) which acts like a "pool of players" with which you can play via an emulated LAN connection (which would mean server hosed on your machine again)
Without a server emulating the blizz server i can't see how this would even be fun to play just then some random custom games. If there is some kind of server(-cluster) blizzard could at least be able to sue the server-provider. Tho i don't know if it is even worth the investigation to sue someone in far far east countries w/o proper laws.
On July 11 2011 14:52 Fir3fly wrote: i see this as "well, battle net is fucked now. chinese have a copy of it. MAY ASWEL PUT IN LAN"
i mean, wasnt the whole point of keeping lan out is so that this doesnt happen?
Or they can take legal action and shut down the Chinese hack server.
It's not like they have to give up entirely just because they encountered one obstacle.
You do realize its not a server that the hacks hosted on but from your own pc, which is how most LAN hacks for games are.
Depending on how it works. I can't imagine that anything like ladder would work when you host the games on your machine. This would mean u could just play custom games which u are the host from.(bad connection, bad latency for everyone)
Or there are servers which emulate the blizz servers (like in CoD4 just on a bigger scale) to which you connect via your hacked client.
A possible Third would be some virtual network (Hamachi, Tunnel etc.) which acts like a "pool of players" with which you can play via an emulated LAN connection (which would mean server hosed on your machine again)
Without a server emulating the blizz server i can't see how this would even be fun to play just then some random custom games. If there is some kind of server(-cluster) blizzard could at least be able to sue the server-provider. Tho i don't know if it is even worth the investigation to sue someone in far far east countries w/o proper laws.
guarentee you 90% of the people that download and use the crack will most likely do it through local LAN and not through a server. If you did host a server that tunnel'd LAN function you would have to host in a country known for not being too harsh with copyright laws.
On July 11 2011 15:30 Axiom0 wrote: Or they can take legal action and shut down the Chinese hack server.
It's not like they have to give up entirely just because they encountered one obstacle.
First of all, there is no game server. The software (crack) made by the Chinese makes a user both a server and client, and everyone else he connects to is a client. It only supports up to 4 players.
Second of all, there is no way Blizzard or even the FBI would be able to do anything about prosecuting the Chinese for their actions as minor as this.
On July 11 2011 17:15 bluQ wrote: Depending on how it works. I can't imagine that anything like ladder would work when you host the games on your machine. This would mean u could just play custom games which u are the host from.(bad connection, bad latency for everyone)
Or there are servers which emulate the blizz servers (like in CoD4 just on a bigger scale) to which you connect via your hacked client.
A possible Third would be some virtual network (Hamachi, Tunnel etc.) which acts like a "pool of players" with which you can play via an emulated LAN connection (which would mean server hosed on your machine again)
Without a server emulating the blizz server i can't see how this would even be fun to play just then some random custom games. If there is some kind of server(-cluster) blizzard could at least be able to sue the server-provider. Tho i don't know if it is even worth the investigation to sue someone in far far east countries w/o proper laws.
Indeed, no ladder currently, not until server tech is cracked/developed. However, you're terribly mistaken regarding the latency" You don't seem to understand the server mechanics of SC2. SC2 does not use significant server resources. Pretty much the only thing a server does once in game is router packets from one player to another... it doesn't modify them, nor verify them, or anything else. Starcraft 1 didn't even have this routing, it was peer to peer, so there was no server at all, yet there was still fine performance, even if 8 people were playing together.
Being the server computer, one should have a good connection, but it doesn't need to be significantly good at all, in fact by most standards it could be quite a cheap connection. if it's 1v1 it doesn't need to be any better at all than normal, and for 4 player games, it just needs to be a tiny bit good (namely in the upload field).
2 computers...heck even 4, with bad connections could play at much lower latency with this crack then they potentially could before on a server. Not all cases (depends on locations and performance of their connection), but it's very very possible.
Tunngle/hamachi is required right now, but only 4 people can play. Once server tech comes out, that sort of method would no longer be as popular.
Server functionality will come eventually, but you're right... there's not as much features in this mode. However, I don't see how you can say it's not fun to play because you're mainly just missing ladder, and meeting new people easily from in-game— neither are that huge (for instance, official battle.net in SC1 has no ladder, and one can meet people via an IRC chat or online forum).
On July 11 2011 17:18 Boblhead wrote: guarentee you 90% of the people that download and use the crack will most likely do it through local LAN and not through a server. If you did host a server that tunnel'd LAN function you would have to host in a country known for not being too harsh with copyright laws.
Russia was the plan. There were other people working on the multiplayer crack going to set up in russia. I know if they were aiming for a server (aside from a server to distribute the crack), but possibly. As it is right now, the crack has to be used through either real LAN or VPN, not P2P/DCC over IP, so 100% of people have no choice. In the future, when server support actually comes out, I'd say the number would be significantly less than 90% (take a look at ICCup and other servers)
On July 12 2011 13:27 Xapti wrote: ... Tunngle/hamachi is required right now, but only 4 people can play. Once server tech comes out, that sort of method would no longer be as popular. ...
you can use an external IP instead of a VPN (tested it, it works)
Axiom0 exactly how much do you think blizzard really lost to piracy? Oh, right you can't answer.
This is yet another example of the fallacy of not including LAN. By LotV there will be enough ways to play without Bliz involvement that if LAN isn't already patched in then it will hardly matter, except for large tournaments.
On July 18 2011 13:29 Probe1 wrote: Axiom0 exactly how much do you think blizzard really lost to piracy? Oh, right you can't answer.
This is yet another example of the fallacy of not including LAN. By LotV there will be enough ways to play without Bliz involvement that if LAN isn't already patched in then it will hardly matter, except for large tournaments.
this is the essential idea to learn.
In the end, Blizzard won't be hosting the game. This is the nature of the game, and of the pro-gaming industry at large. Once this crack can be used in pro-gaming houses effectively I can assure everyone that we will see 100% of professional level players leaving BNet 0.2 there is no reason to have all your stats tracked and visible for potential opponents to learn from. On top of that, professional players don't need to worry about lesser knowns releasing replays of them. The lesser known players do this to gain clout and prestige with the pro-gaming teams, but at the same time it can compromise a top-tier player's strategies and practice if the whole world can see their newest build.
Like stated above, if Blizzard DOESN'T add LAN, someone else will (or already has) and will replace the horribly lack-luster Blizzard ladder and server system with something much more functional (iCCup anyone??) and much less fluffy.
I can't wait until this happens to be honest, because I think that this major paradigm shift for professional players can only help to increase the overall skill ceiling and create much more dynamic games, since there will be much more opportunity for players to hide builds and even practice partners from other players. Even when you use the build order blocking maps, they still show who you played, and what races (at least the last time I checked, maybe different now) were played. Not exactly the most secret practice ever, but its something I suppose.
Once professional players can really hide behind a LAN and practice their eyeballs off, we will start to see some truly epic play emerge, at least I think so.
On July 05 2011 00:41 Morrisson wrote: MOD EDIT: Can't have links to this, sorry.
This is not "LAN mode". It is a crack that runs SC2 through a custom Bnet server which you can run on your local PC. This means instead of connecting and routing all game traffic through official Bnet servers, you connect to a local, custom server on your (or your opponent's) PC and route traffic through that. It is more comparable to bnetd/Iccup than LAN.
Any links to the actual crack or other forms of advertising (guides how to install / run it etc) are not allowed on TL. Thanks.
seems to be a mod made by Chinese to support LAN for SC2.
I'm wondering if tournaments are ever going to use this LAN feature. It happens all the time in tournaments that players will have to restart because someone dropped out due to battle net.
On October 13 2011 23:29 eYeball wrote: I'm wondering if tournaments are ever going to use this LAN feature. It happens all the time in tournaments that players will have to restart because someone dropped out due to battle net.
Is there any new news available regarding this?
No proper tournament would ever use a 3rd party tool for LAN unless Blizzard officially sanctioned it.
blizzard is going to fu** those chinese modders up ... sue them, get a huuuuuge amount of money and than they take that version, cahnge the design a little bit and then sell it on their own to mlg, iem and co.
Just like with the new released units for hots They show the community just the silhouette or what ever this word is written like and then they look at the most creativ comment .... and steal that idea =P
On October 14 2011 00:10 Coopa826 wrote: blizzard is going to fu** those chinese modders up ... sue them, get a huuuuuge amount of money and than they take that version, cahnge the design a little bit and then sell it on their own to mlg, iem and co.
Just like with the new released units for hots They show the community just the silhouette or what ever this word is written like and then they look at the most creativ comment .... and steal that idea =P
EPT
, this is the only way to play sc2 and for them I am happy(if this actually works). For the rest of us who are somewhat interested in the competetive aspect of the scene I guess it wont change much, maybe if on lan and without an internet connection but still wanna mess around with a few games of sc2. 
But in some other countries, I can see tournaments running on this, much as playing BW on LAN. And we may be suprirised even in the US - look at what happened around iphone jalibreaking!
