|
Fenrax
United States5018 Posts
On October 31 2011 00:17 Bobster wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2011 00:12 Fenrax wrote:On October 31 2011 00:02 Bobster wrote:On October 31 2011 00:00 Fenrax wrote:On October 30 2011 23:54 Sandermatt wrote:On October 30 2011 23:52 Fenrax wrote:On October 30 2011 23:47 Stiluz wrote:On October 30 2011 23:38 Fenrax wrote:On October 30 2011 23:34 Sandermatt wrote:On October 30 2011 23:31 Fenrax wrote:
[quote]
A weak community is also the reality. I didn't buy the game because of the lack of LAN. I will buy it the instant it gets LAN (so probably never).
How can Blizzard even dare to fuck their customers like that? How does the community let them get away with it?
Refuse to watch games of this company. Refuse to register at their or their partners sites. Talk bad about them wherever you can because they deserve it. Attack their reputation. Don't give them money. LAN is the big thing, the fat giant dinosaur in the room, but people don't realize just how important LAN is to Esports. Connectivity issues are just a small part of it. What else except the occasional connectivity issues is part of it (does the ping really hinder the players, when they do not play cross server?) It is about control. Without LAN Blizzard can control all tournaments at all times. No one can make a SCII tournament if Blizzard doesn't want them to. They have a perfect monopoly. Which is great. It would be much harder for an organization like Kespa to fuck Blizzard over, since all games have to go through Bnet. I personally support Blizzard's decision to not include LAN - It would be like giving away tons of copies for free (with stuff like virtual network programs etc). Maybe it worked for Broodwar, but this is 2011. My only gripe is that they haven't optimized the latency yet, so that an EU -> KR connection is still laggy. This should be fixable though, coming from a huge company like Blizzard. :-) It is not called "fucking over". It is called competition. For me competition is more if you make your own game to compete with another game. Let's assume you buy a Basketball. Would you say it is totally fair if you had to log onto the basketball producing companies site EVERY TIME when you want to shoot a few baskets with a friend or the basketball won't work. And if their site or your internet doesn't work you can't play. And if they have an issue with you then you can't play somewhere else. But the basketball producing company didn't invent the sport and doesn't have the rights to that sport, so that analogy doesn't work. edit: and I can't think of a real life analogy that works the same as videogame/e-sports licensing, so that's not a dig or anything. LAN would benefit us, the end users. It would not benefit Activision. That's really all there's to it. Disillusioning business realities. :/ And IF a company had monopoly rights to basketball back then and would use it the same way Blizzard does then there would be no NBA. And that is a big point. No LAN is destroying Esports. And I am not kidding. That is the dinosaur. Who makes Broodwar and SCII big? Siege Tanks and Hydralisks or Flash and NesTea? Mineral lines or Stork and HuK? Sorry, I can't quite follow you there. We have no NBA? What does that mean? That we have no tournaments? There are a ton of great tournaments all competing with each other for the domestic and an international audience.
It means that there would not be an independent competition. There are organized players and independent teams. Each has their own interests and power. The league itself is not the perfect example how a league should be managed but overall it works and they'll play again.
If the right and power to shut down any basketball game on the planet at any point of time without a reason was given to some person or company (let's just assume that is somehow possible) then this system would obviously break. All power to organize events is now in one hand.
|
On October 31 2011 00:31 raf3776 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2011 00:29 aimaimaim wrote:On October 31 2011 00:26 raf3776 wrote:On October 31 2011 00:16 aimaimaim wrote:Some arguments here are so flawed it makes Palin a genius compared to these guys. It's like this .. no It's like this .. no fuck you it isn't .. yes it is .. fuck you ..*sigh* On October 31 2011 00:15 Sandermatt wrote:On October 31 2011 00:12 Silentenigma wrote:On October 30 2011 23:47 Stiluz wrote:On October 30 2011 23:38 Fenrax wrote:On October 30 2011 23:34 Sandermatt wrote:On October 30 2011 23:31 Fenrax wrote:
[quote]
A weak community is also the reality. I didn't buy the game because of the lack of LAN. I will buy it the instant it gets LAN (so probably never).
How can Blizzard even dare to fuck their customers like that? How does the community let them get away with it?
Refuse to watch games of this company. Refuse to register at their or their partners sites. Talk bad about them wherever you can because they deserve it. Attack their reputation. Don't give them money. LAN is the big thing, the fat giant dinosaur in the room, but people don't realize just how important LAN is to Esports. Connectivity issues are just a small part of it. What else except the occasional connectivity issues is part of it (does the ping really hinder the players, when they do not play cross server?) It is about control. Without LAN Blizzard can control all tournaments at all times. No one can make a SCII tournament if Blizzard doesn't want them to. They have a perfect monopoly. Which is great. It would be much harder for an organization like Kespa to fuck Blizzard over, since all games have to go through Bnet. I personally support Blizzard's decision to not include LAN - It would be like giving away tons of copies for free (with stuff like virtual network programs etc). Maybe it worked for Broodwar, but this is 2011. My only gripe is that they haven't optimized the latency yet, so that an EU -> KR connection is still laggy. This should be fixable though, coming from a huge company like Blizzard. :-) I cant believe people support no lan.So many tournaments and games are ruined by greedy blizzard.If you want this game competely fair you have to add lan support at least at tournaments. If they add the tournament servers it will be like lan at tournaments, but without the piracy risk. WTF is Piracy risk?? There is already a LAN feature on a hacked version of WoL. Implementation of No-LAN doesn't stop piracy, it encourages it. That doesnt even make sense.. its not encouraging piracy because you cant play multiplayer with piracy.. not many ppl will go thru the trouble with a hacked version of sc2... OMG Yes you can .. WTF did I just said? .. There is already a Hacked version of WoL with LAN support! but how many people will go through the trouble to get a hacked version for lan purposes only.. more ppl will buy the game to play online. So it doesnt encourage piracy..
Ok .. think of it this way ..
Get an Hacked version of WoL with LAN for free, also can be updated to the latest patch and play with friends??
or buy the game and play online people you don't know?
More people would have bought the game if there was LAN.
Think of it this way, the people who wanted to play online will still get B.net2 in their copy. They can still play online on blizzard's servers.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNDDDDDDDDDD
The people who would want to play with their IRL friends. That is where LAN comes into play. They would have bought a legit copy if LAN was implemented. Now, they would only get their feel for SC2 from hackers who posted the hacked version for FREE. Those people who would have bought the game so they can play SC2 will now get a hacked version w/c is basically the same thing only without online play.
|
|
|
On October 31 2011 00:38 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2011 00:17 Bobster wrote:On October 31 2011 00:12 Fenrax wrote:On October 31 2011 00:02 Bobster wrote:On October 31 2011 00:00 Fenrax wrote:On October 30 2011 23:54 Sandermatt wrote:On October 30 2011 23:52 Fenrax wrote:On October 30 2011 23:47 Stiluz wrote:On October 30 2011 23:38 Fenrax wrote:On October 30 2011 23:34 Sandermatt wrote:
[quote]
What else except the occasional connectivity issues is part of it (does the ping really hinder the players, when they do not play cross server?) It is about control. Without LAN Blizzard can control all tournaments at all times. No one can make a SCII tournament if Blizzard doesn't want them to. They have a perfect monopoly. Which is great. It would be much harder for an organization like Kespa to fuck Blizzard over, since all games have to go through Bnet. I personally support Blizzard's decision to not include LAN - It would be like giving away tons of copies for free (with stuff like virtual network programs etc). Maybe it worked for Broodwar, but this is 2011. My only gripe is that they haven't optimized the latency yet, so that an EU -> KR connection is still laggy. This should be fixable though, coming from a huge company like Blizzard. :-) It is not called "fucking over". It is called competition. For me competition is more if you make your own game to compete with another game. Let's assume you buy a Basketball. Would you say it is totally fair if you had to log onto the basketball producing companies site EVERY TIME when you want to shoot a few baskets with a friend or the basketball won't work. And if their site or your internet doesn't work you can't play. And if they have an issue with you then you can't play somewhere else. But the basketball producing company didn't invent the sport and doesn't have the rights to that sport, so that analogy doesn't work. edit: and I can't think of a real life analogy that works the same as videogame/e-sports licensing, so that's not a dig or anything. LAN would benefit us, the end users. It would not benefit Activision. That's really all there's to it. Disillusioning business realities. :/ And IF a company had monopoly rights to basketball back then and would use it the same way Blizzard does then there would be no NBA. And that is a big point. No LAN is destroying Esports. And I am not kidding. That is the dinosaur. Who makes Broodwar and SCII big? Siege Tanks and Hydralisks or Flash and NesTea? Mineral lines or Stork and HuK? Sorry, I can't quite follow you there. We have no NBA? What does that mean? That we have no tournaments? There are a ton of great tournaments all competing with each other for the domestic and an international audience. It means that there would not be an independent competition. There are organized players and independent teams. Each has their own interests and power. The league itself is not the perfect example how a league should be managed but overall it works and they'll play again. If the right and power to shut down any basketball game on the planet at any point of time without a reason was given to some person or company (let's just assume that is somehow possible) then this system would obviously break. All power to organize events is now in one hand.
You make it sound so nefarious.
The various tournament circuits seem to be doing fine so far. Korea, US, EU, SEA - they all have a thriving scene of smaller and larger tournaments (well, Korea only has one large tournament, but you know), some are domestic, some are international. Exchanges are happening, money is flowing in and reaching the players, building up the scene... there's basically no reason to assume that it will be any different in the future.
I mean, I can understand your concerns in theory, but in practice everything seems to be working out just fine so far.
edit: if we're going with real-life analogies, I'm seeing Blizzard similar to the ATP in Tennis, but a lot less "hands-on" in regards to tournament regulations.
|
How can Blizzard ever dream to compete with Kespa on an equal footing? It isn't even close, Blizzard is tons behind western esports organizations who are tons behind Kespa.
It's not about SC BW vs SC2. If tomorrow Blizzard had to run SC BW tournaments and Kespa ran SC2 tournaments, guess which one would be the most popular?
I laugh at every example of Blizzard incompetence, and there are many.
I laugh at their failing tournaments. I laugh at their attempts to balance. I laugh at their PR. I laugh at how their game endings get leaked. I laugh at how Blizzard employers go behind Blizzard's back and sell illegally created runes and items to D2 item shops.
I laugh at how Blizzard failed to promote SC2 in Korea.
I laugh at how they promote homophobia and get crazy backlash.
People always point at Kespa and claim that SC BW players are slaves. But in the mean time SC2 players are nothing. They are just amateurs that have to scrape together the money, beg their parents or a team member that did happen to win a tournament, get a part time job or live on wellfare. And all the time we see how lazy foreign SC2 players are and how they don't practice.
In the mean time SC BW players are professionals with job security and support and infrastructure that for a SC2 player are hard to imagine. SC BW players just have it much better than SC2 players. And they need to do that with a game that is much much less marketable.
It's a miracle.
|
On October 31 2011 00:39 aimaimaim wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2011 00:31 raf3776 wrote:On October 31 2011 00:29 aimaimaim wrote:On October 31 2011 00:26 raf3776 wrote:On October 31 2011 00:16 aimaimaim wrote:Some arguments here are so flawed it makes Palin a genius compared to these guys. It's like this .. no It's like this .. no fuck you it isn't .. yes it is .. fuck you ..*sigh* On October 31 2011 00:15 Sandermatt wrote:On October 31 2011 00:12 Silentenigma wrote:On October 30 2011 23:47 Stiluz wrote:On October 30 2011 23:38 Fenrax wrote:On October 30 2011 23:34 Sandermatt wrote:
[quote]
What else except the occasional connectivity issues is part of it (does the ping really hinder the players, when they do not play cross server?) It is about control. Without LAN Blizzard can control all tournaments at all times. No one can make a SCII tournament if Blizzard doesn't want them to. They have a perfect monopoly. Which is great. It would be much harder for an organization like Kespa to fuck Blizzard over, since all games have to go through Bnet. I personally support Blizzard's decision to not include LAN - It would be like giving away tons of copies for free (with stuff like virtual network programs etc). Maybe it worked for Broodwar, but this is 2011. My only gripe is that they haven't optimized the latency yet, so that an EU -> KR connection is still laggy. This should be fixable though, coming from a huge company like Blizzard. :-) I cant believe people support no lan.So many tournaments and games are ruined by greedy blizzard.If you want this game competely fair you have to add lan support at least at tournaments. If they add the tournament servers it will be like lan at tournaments, but without the piracy risk. WTF is Piracy risk?? There is already a LAN feature on a hacked version of WoL. Implementation of No-LAN doesn't stop piracy, it encourages it. That doesnt even make sense.. its not encouraging piracy because you cant play multiplayer with piracy.. not many ppl will go thru the trouble with a hacked version of sc2... OMG Yes you can .. WTF did I just said? .. There is already a Hacked version of WoL with LAN support! but how many people will go through the trouble to get a hacked version for lan purposes only.. more ppl will buy the game to play online. So it doesnt encourage piracy.. Ok .. think of it this way .. Get an Hacked version of WoL with LAN for free, also can be updated to the latest patch and play with friends?? or buy the game and play online people you don't know? More people would have bought the game if there was LAN. Think of it this way, the people who wanted to play online will still get B.net2 in their copy. They can still play online on blizzard's servers. AAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNDDDDDDDDDD The people who would want to play with their IRL friends. That is where LAN comes into play. They would have bought a legit copy if LAN was implemented. Now, they would only get their feel for SC2 from hackers who posted the hacked version for FREE. Those people who would have bought the game so they can play SC2 will now get a hacked version w/c is basically the same thing only without online play.
What about buying the game and playing with my IRL friends anyways? Online or whatever?
I know I do that all the time, and have no problems with it.
On October 31 2011 00:50 Suisen wrote:
How can Blizzard ever dream to compete with Kespa on an equal footing? It isn't even close, Blizzard is tons behind western esports organizations who are tons behind Kespa.
It's not about SC BW vs SC2. If tomorrow Blizzard had to run SC BW tournaments and Kespa ran SC2 tournaments, guess which one would be the most popular?
I laugh at every example of Blizzard incompetence, and there are many.
I laugh at their failing tournaments. I laugh at their attempts to balance. I laugh at their PR. I laugh at how their game endings get leaked. I laugh at how Blizzard employers go behind Blizzard's back and sell illegally created runes and items to D2 item shops.
I laugh at how Blizzard failed to promote SC2 in Korea.
I laugh at how they promote homophobia and get crazy backlash.
People always point at Kespa and claim that SC BW players are slaves. But in the mean time SC2 players are nothing. They are just amateurs that have to scrape together the money, beg their parents or a team member that did happen to win a tournament, get a part time job or live on wellfare. And all the time we see how lazy foreign SC2 players are and how they don't practice.
In the mean time SC BW players have are professionals with job security and support and infrastructure that for a SC2 player are hard to imagine. SC BW players just have it much better than SC2 players. And they need to do that with a game that is much much less marketable.
It's a miracle.
You understand blizzard is NOT a eSports organization right? They throw their Blizzcon tournament just as one more attraction in the event, but they don't "fail" at it, they just don't care too much about it. What you interpret as their streams "failing" is what they intended to do. They don't need eSports, and they have never claimed to be an organizer. They just promote some tournaments and activities throughout their website but that's about it.
For all the thing you laugh about, Blizzard is one of the, if not THE most successful game developers in the world. So keep on laughing, Blizz really doesn't care 
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
hmh.... i'm sad . bw is really dying now isn't it.
|
Fenrax
United States5018 Posts
On October 31 2011 00:44 Bobster wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2011 00:38 Fenrax wrote:On October 31 2011 00:17 Bobster wrote:On October 31 2011 00:12 Fenrax wrote:On October 31 2011 00:02 Bobster wrote:On October 31 2011 00:00 Fenrax wrote:On October 30 2011 23:54 Sandermatt wrote:On October 30 2011 23:52 Fenrax wrote:On October 30 2011 23:47 Stiluz wrote:On October 30 2011 23:38 Fenrax wrote:
[quote]
It is about control. Without LAN Blizzard can control all tournaments at all times. No one can make a SCII tournament if Blizzard doesn't want them to. They have a perfect monopoly. Which is great. It would be much harder for an organization like Kespa to fuck Blizzard over, since all games have to go through Bnet. I personally support Blizzard's decision to not include LAN - It would be like giving away tons of copies for free (with stuff like virtual network programs etc). Maybe it worked for Broodwar, but this is 2011. My only gripe is that they haven't optimized the latency yet, so that an EU -> KR connection is still laggy. This should be fixable though, coming from a huge company like Blizzard. :-) It is not called "fucking over". It is called competition. For me competition is more if you make your own game to compete with another game. Let's assume you buy a Basketball. Would you say it is totally fair if you had to log onto the basketball producing companies site EVERY TIME when you want to shoot a few baskets with a friend or the basketball won't work. And if their site or your internet doesn't work you can't play. And if they have an issue with you then you can't play somewhere else. But the basketball producing company didn't invent the sport and doesn't have the rights to that sport, so that analogy doesn't work. edit: and I can't think of a real life analogy that works the same as videogame/e-sports licensing, so that's not a dig or anything. LAN would benefit us, the end users. It would not benefit Activision. That's really all there's to it. Disillusioning business realities. :/ And IF a company had monopoly rights to basketball back then and would use it the same way Blizzard does then there would be no NBA. And that is a big point. No LAN is destroying Esports. And I am not kidding. That is the dinosaur. Who makes Broodwar and SCII big? Siege Tanks and Hydralisks or Flash and NesTea? Mineral lines or Stork and HuK? Sorry, I can't quite follow you there. We have no NBA? What does that mean? That we have no tournaments? There are a ton of great tournaments all competing with each other for the domestic and an international audience. It means that there would not be an independent competition. There are organized players and independent teams. Each has their own interests and power. The league itself is not the perfect example how a league should be managed but overall it works and they'll play again. If the right and power to shut down any basketball game on the planet at any point of time without a reason was given to some person or company (let's just assume that is somehow possible) then this system would obviously break. All power to organize events is now in one hand. You make it sound so nefarious. The various tournament circuits seem to be doing fine so far. Korea, US, EU, SEA - they all have a thriving scene of smaller and larger tournaments (well, Korea only has one large tournament, but you know), some are domestic, some are international. Exchanges are happening, money is flowing in and reaching the players, building up the scene... there's basically no reason to assume that it will be any different in the future. I mean, I can understand your concerns in theory, but in practice everything seems to be working out just fine so far. edit: if we're going with real-life analogies, I'm seeing Blizzard similar to the ATP in Tennis, but a lot less "hands-on" in regards to tournament regulations.
It is just a question of time until these things become relevant. It is about money after all. And when they become relevant it will hurt Esport fans severely and they probably won't even know because most of it will happen behind closed curtains. Granted, it might be quite some time until then but think about how long BW is around.
|
On October 31 2011 00:51 mordk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2011 00:39 aimaimaim wrote:On October 31 2011 00:31 raf3776 wrote:On October 31 2011 00:29 aimaimaim wrote:On October 31 2011 00:26 raf3776 wrote:On October 31 2011 00:16 aimaimaim wrote:Some arguments here are so flawed it makes Palin a genius compared to these guys. It's like this .. no It's like this .. no fuck you it isn't .. yes it is .. fuck you ..*sigh* On October 31 2011 00:15 Sandermatt wrote:On October 31 2011 00:12 Silentenigma wrote:On October 30 2011 23:47 Stiluz wrote:On October 30 2011 23:38 Fenrax wrote:
[quote]
It is about control. Without LAN Blizzard can control all tournaments at all times. No one can make a SCII tournament if Blizzard doesn't want them to. They have a perfect monopoly. Which is great. It would be much harder for an organization like Kespa to fuck Blizzard over, since all games have to go through Bnet. I personally support Blizzard's decision to not include LAN - It would be like giving away tons of copies for free (with stuff like virtual network programs etc). Maybe it worked for Broodwar, but this is 2011. My only gripe is that they haven't optimized the latency yet, so that an EU -> KR connection is still laggy. This should be fixable though, coming from a huge company like Blizzard. :-) I cant believe people support no lan.So many tournaments and games are ruined by greedy blizzard.If you want this game competely fair you have to add lan support at least at tournaments. If they add the tournament servers it will be like lan at tournaments, but without the piracy risk. WTF is Piracy risk?? There is already a LAN feature on a hacked version of WoL. Implementation of No-LAN doesn't stop piracy, it encourages it. That doesnt even make sense.. its not encouraging piracy because you cant play multiplayer with piracy.. not many ppl will go thru the trouble with a hacked version of sc2... OMG Yes you can .. WTF did I just said? .. There is already a Hacked version of WoL with LAN support! but how many people will go through the trouble to get a hacked version for lan purposes only.. more ppl will buy the game to play online. So it doesnt encourage piracy.. Ok .. think of it this way .. Get an Hacked version of WoL with LAN for free, also can be updated to the latest patch and play with friends?? or buy the game and play online people you don't know? More people would have bought the game if there was LAN. Think of it this way, the people who wanted to play online will still get B.net2 in their copy. They can still play online on blizzard's servers. AAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNDDDDDDDDDD The people who would want to play with their IRL friends. That is where LAN comes into play. They would have bought a legit copy if LAN was implemented. Now, they would only get their feel for SC2 from hackers who posted the hacked version for FREE. Those people who would have bought the game so they can play SC2 will now get a hacked version w/c is basically the same thing only without online play. What about buying the game and playing with my IRL friends anyways? Online or whatever? I know I do that all the time, and have no problems with it.
Ok .. you need to re-read again what I just said ..
If Blizzard, who didn't put LAN on sc2, added LAN on sc2, then the people who would have bought SC2 for the sole purpose of having to play with friends IRL on a lag-free gaming environment would have bought a legit copy of SC2 instead of supporting the hackers who, right now, gave them the means to do what they wanted to do.
The people who are interested in online SC2 play will still buy the game regardless of it having with LAN or without LAN, regardless of what are their reason for playing online.
|
On October 30 2011 23:13 Fenrax wrote:
This is a serious question: How could SC II ever be a serious sport if the game doesn't even have LAN?
It's obvious that it couldn't imo. Just imagine Flash microing marines with lag... it's like having Roger Federer play tennis with his left hand.
|
Welcome to the 21st century BW pros! I'm excited. I believe some of them are better suited for SC2 than others and there will be some disappointments.
I have never watched SC:BW but I know the feeling some of you have. I feel like that when watching CS1.6 slowly die. Sad but that's how it goes.
|
Can we please talk more about bw teams playing sc2 and less about LAN?
|
On October 31 2011 00:57 aimaimaim wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2011 00:51 mordk wrote:On October 31 2011 00:39 aimaimaim wrote:On October 31 2011 00:31 raf3776 wrote:On October 31 2011 00:29 aimaimaim wrote:On October 31 2011 00:26 raf3776 wrote:On October 31 2011 00:16 aimaimaim wrote:Some arguments here are so flawed it makes Palin a genius compared to these guys. It's like this .. no It's like this .. no fuck you it isn't .. yes it is .. fuck you ..*sigh* On October 31 2011 00:15 Sandermatt wrote:On October 31 2011 00:12 Silentenigma wrote:On October 30 2011 23:47 Stiluz wrote:
[quote]
Which is great. It would be much harder for an organization like Kespa to fuck Blizzard over, since all games have to go through Bnet. I personally support Blizzard's decision to not include LAN - It would be like giving away tons of copies for free (with stuff like virtual network programs etc). Maybe it worked for Broodwar, but this is 2011.
My only gripe is that they haven't optimized the latency yet, so that an EU -> KR connection is still laggy. This should be fixable though, coming from a huge company like Blizzard. :-)
I cant believe people support no lan.So many tournaments and games are ruined by greedy blizzard.If you want this game competely fair you have to add lan support at least at tournaments. If they add the tournament servers it will be like lan at tournaments, but without the piracy risk. WTF is Piracy risk?? There is already a LAN feature on a hacked version of WoL. Implementation of No-LAN doesn't stop piracy, it encourages it. That doesnt even make sense.. its not encouraging piracy because you cant play multiplayer with piracy.. not many ppl will go thru the trouble with a hacked version of sc2... OMG Yes you can .. WTF did I just said? .. There is already a Hacked version of WoL with LAN support! but how many people will go through the trouble to get a hacked version for lan purposes only.. more ppl will buy the game to play online. So it doesnt encourage piracy.. Ok .. think of it this way .. Get an Hacked version of WoL with LAN for free, also can be updated to the latest patch and play with friends?? or buy the game and play online people you don't know? More people would have bought the game if there was LAN. Think of it this way, the people who wanted to play online will still get B.net2 in their copy. They can still play online on blizzard's servers. AAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNDDDDDDDDDD The people who would want to play with their IRL friends. That is where LAN comes into play. They would have bought a legit copy if LAN was implemented. Now, they would only get their feel for SC2 from hackers who posted the hacked version for FREE. Those people who would have bought the game so they can play SC2 will now get a hacked version w/c is basically the same thing only without online play. What about buying the game and playing with my IRL friends anyways? Online or whatever? I know I do that all the time, and have no problems with it. Ok .. you need to re-read again what I just said .. If Blizzard, who didn't put LAN on sc2, added LAN on sc2, then the people who would have bought SC2 for the sole purpose of having to play with friends IRL on a lag-free gaming environment would have bought a legit copy of SC2 instead of supporting the hackers who, right now, gave them the means to do what they wanted to do. The people who are interested in online SC2 play will still buy the game regardless of it having with LAN or without LAN, regardless of what are their reason for playing online.
I bought it for the sole purpose of playing the campaign and playing with my friends... sure LAN would be cool, but I'm not in pain without it, I'm doing fine. Lag is minimal (really minimal) and I get to play 2v2s, customs, etc when I get bored, and do it with my friends as well.
My point is, you can still do it, unless your internet sucks or you live somewhere without internet. Lag is really minimal, and it's used dramatically every time it happens as a flagship for LAN.
1 second of lag = OH BLIZZ YOU MOTHERFUCKERS ADD LAN.. etc... it's just excessive whining.
I see what you're saying, but the fact is you can still do it, bar some pretty uncommon circumstances, it's not that bad.
|
On October 31 2011 00:50 Suisen wrote:
How can Blizzard ever dream to compete with Kespa on an equal footing? It isn't even close, Blizzard is tons behind western esports organizations who are tons behind Kespa.
It's not about SC BW vs SC2. If tomorrow Blizzard had to run SC BW tournaments and Kespa ran SC2 tournaments, guess which one would be the most popular?
I laugh at every example of Blizzard incompetence, and there are many.
I laugh at their failing tournaments. I laugh at their attempts to balance. I laugh at their PR. I laugh at how their game endings get leaked. I laugh at how Blizzard employers go behind Blizzard's back and sell illegally created runes and items to D2 item shops.
I laugh at how Blizzard failed to promote SC2 in Korea.
I laugh at how they promote homophobia and get crazy backlash.
People always point at Kespa and claim that SC BW players are slaves. But in the mean time SC2 players are nothing. They are just amateurs that have to scrape together the money, beg their parents or a team member that did happen to win a tournament, get a part time job or live on wellfare. And all the time we see how lazy foreign SC2 players are and how they don't practice.
In the mean time SC BW players are professionals with job security and support and infrastructure that for a SC2 player are hard to imagine. SC BW players just have it much better than SC2 players. And they need to do that with a game that is much much less marketable.
It's a miracle.
Uhm, Blizzard is not in competition with KeSPA. Blizzard has repeatedly said that they provide the game but wants other parties to run esport, such as GOM, MLG, ESL and KeSPA. Blizzard's role is to support these organizations(of they'd doing a good or bad job at it is another issue), not to run the show them self. If KeSPA is to pick up SC2 they will do it in cooperation with Blizzard, not as a competitor.
|
This thread really serves no purpose right now. You're not discussing the topic you're just arguing in style "your game sux!" "no yours!". What's the point? IMO this thread should get closed until new info gets released.
|
On October 31 2011 01:04 mordk wrote:
1 second of lag = OH BLIZZ YOU MOTHERFUCKERS ADD LAN.. etc... it's just excessive whining. For casual ladder, sure. For 50k event finals with 300+ eAPM (~5+ actions per second, no spam), Flash would be like: "guys, call me when the game can be played, thanks."
|
On October 31 2011 00:50 Suisen wrote:
How can Blizzard ever dream to compete with Kespa on an equal footing? It isn't even close, Blizzard is tons behind western esports organizations who are tons behind Kespa.
It's not about SC BW vs SC2. If tomorrow Blizzard had to run SC BW tournaments and Kespa ran SC2 tournaments, guess which one would be the most popular?
I laugh at every example of Blizzard incompetence, and there are many.
I laugh at their failing tournaments. I laugh at their attempts to balance. I laugh at their PR. I laugh at how their game endings get leaked. I laugh at how Blizzard employers go behind Blizzard's back and sell illegally created runes and items to D2 item shops.
I laugh at how Blizzard failed to promote SC2 in Korea.
I laugh at how they promote homophobia and get crazy backlash.
People always point at Kespa and claim that SC BW players are slaves. But in the mean time SC2 players are nothing. They are just amateurs that have to scrape together the money, beg their parents or a team member that did happen to win a tournament, get a part time job or live on wellfare. And all the time we see how lazy foreign SC2 players are and how they don't practice.
In the mean time SC BW players are professionals with job security and support and infrastructure that for a SC2 player are hard to imagine. SC BW players just have it much better than SC2 players. And they need to do that with a game that is much much less marketable.
It's a miracle.
You know Blizzard competes in developing games, right?
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES51702 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:27 Oktyabr wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2011 00:50 Suisen wrote:
How can Blizzard ever dream to compete with Kespa on an equal footing? It isn't even close, Blizzard is tons behind western esports organizations who are tons behind Kespa.
It's not about SC BW vs SC2. If tomorrow Blizzard had to run SC BW tournaments and Kespa ran SC2 tournaments, guess which one would be the most popular?
I laugh at every example of Blizzard incompetence, and there are many.
I laugh at their failing tournaments. I laugh at their attempts to balance. I laugh at their PR. I laugh at how their game endings get leaked. I laugh at how Blizzard employers go behind Blizzard's back and sell illegally created runes and items to D2 item shops.
I laugh at how Blizzard failed to promote SC2 in Korea.
I laugh at how they promote homophobia and get crazy backlash.
People always point at Kespa and claim that SC BW players are slaves. But in the mean time SC2 players are nothing. They are just amateurs that have to scrape together the money, beg their parents or a team member that did happen to win a tournament, get a part time job or live on wellfare. And all the time we see how lazy foreign SC2 players are and how they don't practice.
In the mean time SC BW players are professionals with job security and support and infrastructure that for a SC2 player are hard to imagine. SC BW players just have it much better than SC2 players. And they need to do that with a game that is much much less marketable.
It's a miracle. You know Blizzard competes in developing games, right?
and they should stick to doing just that,they should not control how their games should end up as esports.
|
On October 30 2011 08:02 pdd wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2011 02:18 chatuka wrote:
I think MMA could compete if he trains hard enough and eats healthy food. brain food no toxic non-sense
top SC2 players could go like this.
1. Flash (terran)
2. Jaedong? (Zerg)
3. Jangbi(Protoss)
4. Bisu (Protoss)
5. MMA?(terran)
6 Fantasy(Terran)
7. MVP(terran)
8. zero(zerg)
9. Huk(Protoss)
10. MC(Protoss)
Shuttle, Calm, Hyuk are probably top 20
MKP, Ryung, Puzzle, Rainbow are top 50.
If Effort gets back in the money game.. he could be a dark horse.
Stephano is also a wild card. he could be top five he decides SC2 as a career.
Nestea would be probably around top 15. I tried to believe that you were making a very detailed analysis and forecast of the future. Then I saw the parts in bold (and underlined). Now I' am 100% certain you're trolling.
you're probably right about rainbow. I am a fanboy of his.
|
Do not let whiners get this thread closed. This is very important to the SC2 and BW communities. These arguments are essential for the future of both games. Myself and others are being educated in the differences of both games constantly throughout the thread. Many important points have been made and many issues have been discussed with the transition. Don't say this thread serves no purpose when all of the discussion, as biased as they may be, have introduced many elements that should be considered if this change were to take place. Speak for yourself please.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
