LoL to get LAN. Where's SC2s?

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?

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?

On October 13 2012 08:13 Liquid`NonY wrote:

You are right no one has asked Blizzard for LAN yet. Someone get on that!

On October 13 2012 08:13 Liquid`NonY wrote:

You are right no one has asked Blizzard for LAN yet. Someone get on that!

On October 13 2012 08:15 setzer wrote:
Blizzard just doesn't have the technology to make it possible.

On October 13 2012 08:21 HooK2000 wrote:

Your post is like "Santa doesnt have the technology to deliver presents on Christmas." ...

On October 13 2012 08:10 mrRoflpwn wrote:
Why do people keep making threads about things that have bee discussed to death multiple times?? Is it really that hard to not understand that piracy is the biggest reason??

On October 13 2012 08:10 Fionn wrote:
If SC2 was free-to-play, it would have LAN.

It's not, so it doesn't have it.

On October 13 2012 08:22 HiTeK532 wrote:

WTF piracy is not the biggest reason and I doubt it is a reason at all. Control is the reason SC2 doesn't have lan. If it did have lan tournaments would have no incentive to pay blizzard for the use of their game. As it stands if a tournament is unsanctioned by blizzard, blizzard has the ability to stop players from accessing bnet and therefore stopping the tournament. So in order for GOM/KESPA/MLG to run SC2 tournaments they have to pay blizzard and if payments ever stop while then blizzard can pull the plug on the tournament.
As for all the people who say sell tournament editions with LAN that doesn't solve the problem because after and organization gets lan then blizzard has no control again.

On October 13 2012 08:24 shizaep wrote:

Yeah, this is pretty much it. If SC2 got LAN, Blizzard would lose too much money from people who pirate it and play LAN, or use programs that emulate a LAN environment, such as Garena, to play on private servers.

On October 13 2012 08:11 mrtomjones wrote:
Man.. you need to think before you complain. Free to play vs pay to play. Blizzard does not want people to play their game for free and unfortunately this is one effective way to stop it. They are putting in new functions for tournaments as it is but I very much doubt you will ever see Lan for SC2.

On October 13 2012 08:17 zhurai wrote:

(it was Sarcasm if you couldn't tell -_-)

not like complaining at either place would do anything at this point.

On October 13 2012 08:32 TotalBiscuit wrote:


Counter-argument. Riot is not a charity, they rely on their unlock system to make money. As with all F2P games, this involves accounts being stored on the server to ensure that people do not get free shit. A LAN client opens up the door to hacking the game and allowing all champs and skins to be unlocked. This is equivalent to SC2 "piracy" that would result from LAN. Let's just ignore the fact that wringing your hands over piracy for a game that's 2 years old is just idiotic.

Second point, this is not the real reason that SC2 doesn't have LAN, it's due to KESPAs previous bullshit. The use of a LAN client for tournaments would have to be authorized and monitored. If KESPA got ahold of it there's the potential to open pandora's box and cut off Blizzards influence in Korea once again, though you would think Blizzard has put MORE than enough legal protections in place to prevent that from happening now.

One way or the other Blizzard should be ashamed of themselves. A F2P entirely online game is about to beat them in the "technology" race and clearly demonstrating that they care about the player experience and tournament legitimacy.

On October 13 2012 08:10 mrRoflpwn wrote:
Why do people keep making threads about things that have bee discussed to death multiple times?? Is it really that hard to not understand that piracy is the biggest reason??

On October 13 2012 08:10 Fionn wrote:
If SC2 was free-to-play, it would have LAN.

It's not, so it doesn't have it.

On October 13 2012 08:59 Silencioseu wrote:
I think blizzard's concern is that if SC2 gets LAN it will be easily pirated.

On October 13 2012 09:02 writer22816 wrote:
So according to your logic, paid games should have fewer features than free games?

On October 13 2012 09:02 Juggernaut477 wrote:



You can already pirate sc2,you just can't play on Bnet. Adding LAN will do nothing other then Blizzard will no longer look stupid as fuck every time there is a dc in a tournament.

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.

On October 13 2012 09:17 Talack wrote:
Riot and blizzards commitment to seeing their game grow as an esport is a night and day difference, you can't really compare the two.

Riot does almost everything and anything possible. Blizzard tells us to go fuck ourselves and likes to talk about how great everyone is doing.

-From a blizzard fanboy

On October 13 2012 08:21 HooK2000 wrote:

Your post is like "Santa doesnt have the technology to deliver presents on Christmas." ...

On October 13 2012 08:10 Fionn wrote:
If SC2 was free-to-play, it would have LAN.

It's not, so it doesn't have it.

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?

On October 13 2012 09:42 GreEny K wrote:


You don't think putting a complaint on the largest SC2 site is going to make Blizzard notice? huh...

And I saw the reply to Nony's post... back peddle back peddle pack peddle...

On October 13 2012 09:49 MicroTastiC wrote:
don't implement LAN. this would disconnect the PLAYERS from the PROFESSIONALS. sometimes, its just easier to communicate without LAN. and i like random PMs on streams by random players to PRO players.

it's hilarious. LAN would not only remove, but destroy this concept.

tl;dr: FUCK LAN

On October 13 2012 08:42 Haee wrote:

I thought Blizzard actually stated themselves that the reason was mostly due to piracy. In fact just look at Diablo 3 as a prime example of Blizzard's direction of consistently trying to force players to stay online to the point of actually stripping away any form of offline play.

On October 13 2012 09:58 TotalBiscuit wrote:


Hahaha, what the fuck is this

On October 13 2012 08:17 zhurai wrote:

(it was Sarcasm if you couldn't tell -_-)

not like complaining at either place would do anything at this point.

On October 13 2012 08:06 Fueled wrote:
Thoughts?

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.

On October 13 2012 10:36 Jojo131 wrote:

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.

On October 13 2012 08:13 Liquid`NonY wrote:

You are right no one has asked Blizzard for LAN yet. Someone get on that!

On October 13 2012 10:43 NovaTheFeared wrote:


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.

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.

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.

On October 13 2012 09:16 Shiori wrote:

I don't think you understand what competition actually is.

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.

On October 13 2012 12:13 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:


Soo how is complaining to TL better?

On October 13 2012 13:20 RockIronrod wrote:
I don't know why we're using LoL as a benchmark for esports, especially since it is a travesty right now.

On October 13 2012 08:32 TotalBiscuit wrote:


Counter-argument. Riot is not a charity, they rely on their unlock system to make money. As with all F2P games, this involves accounts being stored on the server to ensure that people do not get free shit. A LAN client opens up the door to hacking the game and allowing all champs and skins to be unlocked. This is equivalent to SC2 "piracy" that would result from LAN. Let's just ignore the fact that wringing your hands over piracy for a game that's 2 years old is just idiotic.

Second point, this is not the real reason that SC2 doesn't have LAN, it's due to KESPAs previous bullshit. The use of a LAN client for tournaments would have to be authorized and monitored. If KESPA got ahold of it there's the potential to open pandora's box and cut off Blizzards influence in Korea once again, though you would think Blizzard has put MORE than enough legal protections in place to prevent that from happening now.

One way or the other Blizzard should be ashamed of themselves. A F2P entirely online game is about to beat them in the "technology" race and clearly demonstrating that they care about the player experience and tournament legitimacy.

On October 13 2012 13:20 RockIronrod wrote:
I don't know why we're using LoL as a benchmark for esports, especially since it is a travesty right now.

On October 13 2012 13:32 MaestroSC wrote:


because it doesn't draw 5-10x the numbers of any other esport currently in existence?

But what does success have to do with success.

But what does viewership really mean... in a sport where viewership means everything... like more money. Money isn't that important in business anyways tho, you are right. Money only funds teams, tournaments, and the company that makes the game. But what does that really mean besides a larger scene, with more teams, more sponsorship money, and even bigger prizes and tournaments?

You are right. Clearly it makes no sense that other esports should strive to be as successful as LoL.

the LoL PLAYOFFS (not even the finals) had over 500,000 concurrent viewers.

Another game that has done that before is.... FALSE.

On October 13 2012 13:54 Cubu wrote:
Does LAN really matter in this day and age?

On October 13 2012 14:24 dragonblade369 wrote:


You do know how LoL viewship works right? They are not real viewers, client-embedded viewers are not watching the game lol

On October 13 2012 08:10 Fionn wrote:
If SC2 was free-to-play, it would have LAN.

It's not, so it doesn't have it.

On October 13 2012 08:10 Fionn wrote:
If SC2 was free-to-play, it would have LAN.

It's not, so it doesn't have it.

On October 13 2012 13:32 MaestroSC wrote:


because it doesn't draw 5-10x the numbers of any other esport currently in existence?

But what does success have to do with success.

But what does viewership really mean... in a sport where viewership means everything... like more money. Money isn't that important in business anyways tho, you are right. Money only funds teams, tournaments, and the company that makes the game. But what does that really mean besides a larger scene, with more teams, more sponsorship money, and even bigger prizes and tournaments?

You are right. Clearly it makes no sense that other esports should strive to be as successful as LoL.

the LoL PLAYOFFS (not even the finals) had over 500,000 concurrent viewers.

Another game that has done that before is.... FALSE.

On October 13 2012 15:09 Forikorder wrote:
LoL is already free so LoL doesnt ahve to worry about people ripping it off

SC2 is not free so Blizz does

On October 13 2012 08:09 strongandbig wrote:
isn't lol ftp? The whole "we dont want people to pirate our game" thing doesn't apply. Not that I think blizzard is necessarily on the right side of that, but it's really a whole different question.

On October 13 2012 08:10 Fionn wrote:
If SC2 was free-to-play, it would have LAN.
It's not, so it doesn't have it.

On October 13 2012 08:13 Narfinger wrote:
Easy. Just ask Kespa. Did you already forgot what they did try a few weeks ago?

Or to be precise: Lan just for tournaments kills competition because the players can't train with the same latency. Lan for everyone, says hello to Kespa.

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.

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.

People are saying that it is because of piracy have no idea what is going on. No. Piracy does not hurt as much as you think. It doesn't hurt at all. Piracy provides exposure, and with more exposure, the game gets more popular. As a company your primary goal is exposure, to get as many people to know about it as possible. that is how you make money in the long run.

On October 13 2012 15:10 Xapti wrote:
Even if this were true (which it isn't, as I previously explained), that's improper reasoning. Starcraft 2 already has an excellent 3rd party LAN system, so it really makes very little sense for Blizzard not to allow LAN,since they're not really stopping anyone from playing LAN, they're just making it SLIGHTLY more of a hassle.
On the other hand, the LoL does not have a 3rd party LAN (I could be wrong), and it's harder to emulate as far as I know, which makes it more reasonable to keep no LAN functionality.

I haven't heard — can you explain?
If some group (ie. KeSPA) is finally using 3rd party LAN for SC2 tournaments I'm glad; It's about time someone did.

Sorry dude but you must have been living under a rock for the last year or more — SC2 has had 3rd party LAN for a long time — that's not what's stopping people from playing LAN, it's the laws that are stopping them.

On October 13 2012 15:55 Kluey wrote:
How the fuck does it promote piracy? You don't make it open to everyone... Just to every event that is above a certain prize pool or audience. Any tournament with a prize pool above 5,000 has to pay Blizzard money anyways right?

On October 13 2012 17:56 LaNague wrote:
This LoL LAN is not really a LAN mode, its more like moving a company server to the tournament.
LoL might be free to play, but Riot makes huge amounts of money with selling skins for the heroes, so they too wont ever give away a LAN mode.

On October 13 2012 17:57 CoR wrote:
never
is not needed and will only end in nonstop hacked versions

On October 13 2012 08:54 Juggernaut477 wrote:


No one is gonna pirate sc2 to play versus the Ai or have their friends bring their entire set ups over.

On October 13 2012 10:13 drbrown wrote:
Man this is annoying to know, one LoL tournament gets fucked up by lack of LAN and Riot is right on it.
Several SC2 series/tournaments including a certain GSTL finals have been ruined by lack of LAN and Blizzard keeps ignoring it.

On October 13 2012 19:24 AzureHath wrote:
SC2 will never see LAN while it operates a non-F2P model.

On October 13 2012 08:13 Narfinger wrote:
Easy. Just ask Kespa. Did you already forgot what they did try a few weeks ago?

Or to be precise: Lan just for tournaments kills competition because the players can't train with the same latency. Lan for everyone, says hello to Kespa.

On October 13 2012 18:30 Figgy wrote:


SC2 has never had an issue anywhere near as bad as what just happened. Anyone who was actually watching the lol tournament will know this.

They had to restart THREE times and finally gave up before deciding to reschedule the match. Nothing to this extent has ever and will ever happen due to SC2 due to disconnects. Especially with the new resume from replay feature.

People comparing the 2 situations clearly have no idea what actually happened.

On October 13 2012 13:14 dragonblade369 wrote:
Will pro have access to LAN mode without playing in a tournament? They need to get used to LAN latency in order to play well at tournament. Otherwise, it's better not to have LAN

On October 13 2012 08:15 setzer wrote:
Blizzard just doesn't have the technology to make it possible.

On October 13 2012 15:33 Nighttmoon wrote:
People are saying that it is because of piracy have no idea what is going on. No. Piracy does not hurt as much as you think. It doesn't hurt at all. Piracy provides exposure, and with more exposure, the game gets more popular. As a company your primary goal is exposure, to get as many people to know about it as possible. that is how you make money in the long run.

The mean reason is control. Esports is an industry, and Starcraft 2 is the at the center of all of this. Blizzard would not risk giving up control. If they gave people LAN, than it would mean people anywhere around the world can host a tournament with out there permission. With LAN, people can potentially make money off of Starcraft 2 and cut off Blizzard as the middleman completely. Just like KESPA did with BW. Why did you think that it took this long for KESPA to switch to Starcraft 2?

ESports is not a booming industry at all, although the gaming industry is. But there is a difference between ESports and general gaming.

LoL has great exposure, the majority of LoL players are casual players, some of them have never even played games before starting LoL. Why is it so successful? It is because a lot of people know about, unlike Starcraft which only appeals to a small audience. If this is where Blizzard is heading, then Starcraft will eventually die off. Esports is already at such mercy of the fans. MLG even have to charge 10 dollars viewing fee.

At the end of the day, its all about the money.

I wish Blizzard would sell the rights of Starcraft to Valve

On October 13 2012 21:14 MyNameIsAlex wrote:

starfriend does 2 years now



this is the real reason

On October 13 2012 21:25 windzor wrote:


If Blizzard controls the LAN tournament server, they can control the tournament market in the same way as they do now. So it's a bad argument. Remember the announced LAN feature by riot is a LAN server given by them...

Also, I do believe the game market still believes that piracy hurts the industry. It's very clear to see this with the amount of anti piracy software is delivered with new blockbusters. If this is true is still to be determined, but most things shows this is not true. But companies still don't believe it.

On October 13 2012 21:28 MyNameIsAlex wrote:

how can they control a tournament server if its setup in your house/net cafe?

On October 13 2012 21:30 Black[CAT] wrote:
SC2 will never get LAN, just like it will never get clan tags and shared replay watching.

On October 13 2012 21:24 foxj wrote:


And Valve will turn it into crap like CSGO DotA 2 ? well played

On October 13 2012 21:28 MyNameIsAlex wrote:

how can they control a tournament server if its setup in your house/net cafe?

On October 13 2012 21:24 foxj wrote:


And Valve will turn it into crap like CSGO DotA 2 ? well played

On October 13 2012 22:08 pallad wrote:
LOL @ people that say Bw had lan.. give it to SC 2 NOW NOW ! hahaha . In times when blizzard was making money by selling SC/BW game piracy was not that "popular" , they didint lose much money by it.
Now we have other times , every game developers company protect own games , its natural . You all just need grown up , time for games was changed long time ago

On October 13 2012 08:10 Fionn wrote:
If SC2 was free-to-play, it would have LAN.

It's not, so it doesn't have it.

On October 14 2012 02:31 YaShock wrote:


Good argument, except that any other serious non free-to-play game has LAN, only Blizzard did this

On October 13 2012 13:01 zhurai wrote:

that's what I've been asking this whole thread really but nobody has answered any good reasons >>

On October 13 2012 22:08 pallad wrote:
LOL @ people that say Bw had lan.. give it to SC 2 NOW NOW ! hahaha . In times when blizzard was making money by selling SC/BW game piracy was not that "popular" , they didint lose much money by it.
Now we have other times , every game developers company protect own games , its natural . You all just need grown up , time for games was changed long time ago



and why you lie.. ? shared replay watching and many more , was already annunced with HOTS , same as cross region play etc



Dota 2 is a crap ? lol get a life man , or back to play LOL

On October 13 2012 22:08 pallad wrote:
LOL @ people that say Bw had lan.. give it to SC 2 NOW NOW ! hahaha . In times when blizzard was making money by selling SC/BW game piracy was not that "popular" , they didint lose much money by it.
Now we have other times , every game developers company protect own games , its natural . You all just need grown up , time for games was changed long time ago

On October 14 2012 04:33 StarStruck wrote:



Gmae piracy/bootlegging and all that crap was very popular even back then. -__-

They lost a lot of money from it. As for DRM being the new thing. You see lots of companies scratching that altogether because a) it doesn't work b) it costs them more to implement.

-_-

On October 13 2012 15:10 Xapti wrote:

Sorry dude but you must have been living under a rock for the last year or more — SC2 has had 3rd party LAN for a long time — that's not what's stopping people from playing LAN, it's the laws that are stopping them.

On October 14 2012 05:47 Falling wrote:
I don't play DOTA2, but I 100% support their efforts because they've taken up the flag for LAN gaming in an age where we're moving more and more to always-online/ glorified game rentals. (You never truly own your game if gameplay is dependent on the game companies servers.)

On October 14 2012 06:47 Daniri wrote:


DotA 2 requires Steam and is made by the owner of Steam. How did you try even attempting this ownership point without your brain exploding?

On October 13 2012 08:10 mrRoflpwn wrote:
Why do people keep making threads about things that have bee discussed to death multiple times?? Is it really that hard to not understand that piracy is the biggest reason??

On October 14 2012 07:00 Morfildur wrote:


Yes, but you don't own any of those games, they are all just rented...

On October 14 2012 08:34 XiGua wrote:
LoL is Free To Play.

SC2 is not.

And that's all you need to know.

On October 13 2012 08:10 Fionn wrote:
If SC2 was free-to-play, it would have LAN.

It's not, so it doesn't have it.

On October 14 2012 06:47 Daniri wrote:


DotA 2 requires Steam and is made by the owner of Steam. How did you try even attempting this ownership point without your brain exploding?

On October 14 2012 10:36 Falling wrote:

I don't think DOTA 2 through Steam is an ideal situation, but at least one gaming company (and now two) is saying that yes, LAN is useful now. Rather than this silly "LAN is a thing of the past. Get over it." We can't get away from this bad argument fast enough as far as I'm concerned. Lowering internet lag and latency is priceless for competitive gaming.

On October 14 2012 10:50 FabledIntegral wrote:
It's not coming. They've made it clear. Browder even said at an interview at my school last year that LAN wasn't coming (the way he said it, he implied ever), it wasn't being considered, and that he would appreciate if no questions were asked about it.

On October 13 2012 08:10 Fionn wrote:
If SC2 was free-to-play, it would have LAN.

It's not, so it doesn't have it.

On October 15 2012 05:12 Kennigit wrote:
Of course piracy is a concern, but it's less of a concern when your game is a free to play game with microtransactions vs a 1 time purchase. If you "lose" the sale (yes this is debatable, whether the pirate would buy it in in the first place blah blah), you are guaranteed to lose 59.99 or w/e the sale price is. With a moba, only a certain percentage actually pay for upgrades, and the incentive isn't as strong to steal a free product.

As long as SC2 doesn't have some sort of microtransaction model to justify the business expense of investing significant amounts into progaming, Blizzard will always be 3rd behind Riot and Valve for support. It just doesn't make sense to do the kind of support when sc2 esports revenue is pretty much negligible.

On October 15 2012 05:33 Derrida wrote:


They don't have to release the sourcecode for LAN though, I'm pretty sure they could make a server just for major-premier events, and send 1 techguy to each event.

On October 15 2012 06:26 Xapti wrote:

That, plus the much more important fact which is that in SC2 vs LoL, SC2 already has a 3rd party LAN, so there's very little danger even if the LAN mode does leak outside of the tournament scene.

There is no 3rd party LAN for LoL as far as I know, so overall it might be more damaging to them in my opinion if their LAN mode got leaked.

That said, the chance of it leaking is low if the proper security precautions are taken.

On October 14 2012 10:49 Nausea wrote:
I think it has been pretty obvious in recent years that blizzard is mostly trying to break even
until they release their next cash cow "Titan".

Just pushing out mediocre stuff to keep them at a stable course and then cash in on their new mmo, and repeat.

There will never be a LAN mode in any Blizzard releases ever again.

On October 13 2012 08:10 mrRoflpwn wrote:
Why do people keep making threads about things that have bee discussed to death multiple times?? Is it really that hard to not understand that piracy is the biggest reason??

On October 15 2012 10:00 DeCoup wrote:
Halo4 to have LAN. Where's SC2s?
Understand how silly this conversation is yet? You can't compare LoL and SC.

On October 15 2012 09:07 Assirra wrote:

Little danger?
The moment Blizzard notices this LAN way is leaked you can bet your ass they will respond and hard.
In case you didn't noticed. ALL your info is on their servers and they can simply lock you down completely with a press of the button.
And if they do that and you complain and pirate it to play again you once again supported their piracy statement.

On October 15 2012 07:20 Serpico wrote:
There won't be LAN because ESPORTS is a joke in Blizzard's list of priorities. We don't benefit them much at all and to be honest they'd rather have an amazing single player to sell to casuals more than anything.

On October 15 2012 10:34 Kazeyonoma wrote:
And they've already stated they're implementing resume from replay with HotS. what more do you want. Even LAN won't solve issues like a pc's netcard dying, but resume from replay will. can we stop this now? complain again if HotS delivers with out it k?

On October 15 2012 10:34 Kazeyonoma wrote:
And they've already stated they're implementing resume from replay with HotS. what more do you want. Even LAN won't solve issues like a pc's netcard dying, but resume from replay will. can we stop this now? complain again if HotS delivers with out it k?