|
On October 13 2012 08:13 Liquid`NonY wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 08:07 zhurai wrote: Maybe complaining to the people who actually make the game would be a better idea than putting it at Teamliquid who doesn't make the game? You are right no one has asked Blizzard for LAN yet. Someone get on that!
Holy trolling batman! Nice to see you Nony, your response should have ended this thread but instead it will keep it going much longer ;p
|
On October 13 2012 10:43 NovaTheFeared wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 10:36 Jojo131 wrote:On October 13 2012 10:18 NovaTheFeared wrote: Here is a vivid example of the difference in business models. Once you've paid your 60$, Blizzard doesn't GIVE A SHIT. You can complain as much as you want and it will all fall on deaf ears because they have your money and they're not getting any more from you for that game. Blizzard clearly doesn't have a reputation to keep, and they especially do not have any future games that they'd love to sell to their fanbase that may or may not hate their current "shit-giving" attitude.. It's a good thing blizzard doesn't give a shit because we all bought SC2 and thats (coincidentally) the only game they'll be making, they should run with their money now before we notice! Yeah I'm pretty sure they at least give some shit to what we think. Blizzard has shown that they care much less about their brand quality than they used to. SC2's battle net a step backward from SC and lack of LAN play. D3 release, infinite problems. MoP? Sells less in a week than Cata in a day. So even though you're being sarcastic, you're actually correct. I'm currently playing MoP actually, and I can definitely put my word out there to say that it's a big improvement from the disappointment of Cataclysm, and definitely one of the best expansions once you get your nostalgia out of the way. Especially in WoW's case, first week sales dont reflect anything other than the hype surrounding the upcoming product. Cata was puffed up and supposed to be the best thing to ever hit WoW, while Blizz kept their head tucked down for MoP in terms of advertising. D3 has been bagged on for all the problems during release, and thats all that will be remembered by people who left after the first few months. I've never played it personally, but I'm pretty sure we've had quite a number of people from TL say that the game is much better now as well.
You're not really making any sense by saying they dont care about their reputation, especially considering that Blizzard is also working on an entirely new franchise-- whose sales will probably be determined mostly by the current reputation of their other games right now.
|
On October 13 2012 08:24 Zato-1 wrote: @OP: Did you see the massive shitfest that was the Season 2 League of Legends World Series? One quarter-finals game (between CLG.eu and World Elite) had to be replayed like 3 times until eventually they gave up and had to postpone the match for another day.
That? That's inexcusable.
SC2 has had some hiccups, but overall the lack of LAN hasn't been catastrophic for tournament and league experience.
You should've mentioned the somewhat totally obvious cheating that took place too but it's cool.
|
Its all Activision. Their entire mindset on this issue is all DRM and how to make their games impossible to pirate.
Why is Dota2 getting lan? Valve has a completely different stance on piracy, they view it as a service issue. If their service was good enough, the pirates would convert to steam.
Activion has a completely different view on piracy, they view it as if their product was impossible to pirate, then all the pirates would suddenly have buy their game. Ingenious
|
On October 13 2012 11:02 TheWorldToCome wrote: Having to play through battle.net is the only leverage that blizz or GOM has of kespa becoming what is was in sc1.
That doesn't make any sense, as Blizzard will still "own" the lanbox, and they could simply refuse to lend one out to kespa. The software on those boxes arent anything you can "copy". Which is why excuses like "piracy" and what you just posted doesn't hold up in the slightest.
|
"WE WANT LAN!" - The whole GSTL Final crowd...
Blizzards Response: Ohhhh myyyyyy.... OH WELL REGAME!
|
Blizzards argument against LAN is basically that they are worried that there will be a matchmaking system like Garena or iccup which people will use instead of bnet.
Seems like they are worried a bunch of guys working for free could make a better matchmaking system than BNet 2.0.
Well, that's understandable.
|
I think Riot did it because what happened during that was SO massive that they had to do something. LAN was the only logical choice because DotA 2 already has LAN and the game isn't even released yet. If Riot didn't add LAN, I'm sure people would question it until they gave in.
SC2 hasn't had that happen yet, and until something huge like that happens for SC2, Blizz won't budge.
|
Do it SC2. Don't be too greedy.
|
On October 13 2012 09:16 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 09:11 NeutraLiTe wrote: Some of you guys have really short memories. With no LAN, Blizzard essentially holds the nuclear option in any eSF/KeSPA debacle that can (and most likely will) arise in the future. Competition encourages healthy growth of esports, and if there was a LAN mode in the game KeSPA could essentially give the middle finger to eSF and Blizzard and pull all their players out of every foreign tournament and the GSL.
Blizzard more than likely WAS going to step into the GSL Season 4 / Season 5 issue, but eSF took it upon itself to pull its players out of the OSL.
This all isn't to say places like MLG, IPL, GSL, etc should not have a LAN client, but I'm sure Blizzard is terrified it could basically be "cracked" by tournament employees and thus the nuclear option is lost. I don't think you understand what competition actually is.
So what you're saying is things would be more competitive if KeSPA singlehandedly segregated the two leagues like they wanted to and have done before in BW. Gotcha.
|
Blizzard will give us LAN once they economically need to. Most likely after LOTV starts to wan in popularity. Then we can have all the SC2 LAN parties we want.
All while we bitch about SC3 ruining ESports.
|
|
Couldn't they partner with MLG,IPL, etc, to have a LAN version only accessible for these tournaments? Or would have be hackable too?
|
People that watch a lot of tournies only benefit from no lan, every time broadband goes down at an event they actually wait for it to be fixed so they can play, instead of playing it out on lan and showing you a vod the next day...
|
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
I'm with the guy on page #1, lets start small, and once Blizzard figures out a way to allow you to change your character name, then we might start thinking about the technological leaps necessary to do the bigger stuff.
|
No LAN for SC2 ever! Thanks to KesPa!
|
SC2 doesn't have LAN to assure that players are guaranteed the best gaming experience... Oh wait...
|
On October 13 2012 08:08 ExPresident wrote: Blizzard likes to operate on a 1 step forward, 3 steps back tempo. What was possible 10 years ago just isn't now you know.
Good for LoL
Edit -
To the person above me, people have complained to blizzard, didn't do any good.
Soo how is complaining to TL better?
|
Thing is : LoL is a free game, they don't have to worry about piracy there
|
On October 13 2012 12:13 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 08:08 ExPresident wrote: Blizzard likes to operate on a 1 step forward, 3 steps back tempo. What was possible 10 years ago just isn't now you know.
Good for LoL
Edit -
To the person above me, people have complained to blizzard, didn't do any good. Soo how is complaining to TL better? that's what I've been asking this whole thread really but nobody has answered any good reasons >>
|
|
|
|