No Lan in SC2

I think the reason they aren't explaining there new system is that they are not 100% sure what it will be or how it will work. I just think they have a couple ideas about they can do, and they are sure about what they don't want to do. In essence I think they told us what they know for sure. The reason I think they aren't sure what they want to do yet is because the way karune talked, it seemed as if the only thing set in stone was that they didn't want LAN.

 

My theory as to why it's not yet revealed is, Blizzcon, save some sweet press news for an event you're charging people $125 to attend. The reason they mentioned no LAN prior to that, has been guessed at already in this thread, in I believe that it slipped out. They were answering questions, and most times they'll snicker they've said too much, such as this event where they said enough to start a panic of sorts. (As for why they didn't just blurt out the rest, they know prior to beta/release, there is no fear to lose already interested customers. They have a nice time gap to prove their product still worthy to those crying for heads to roll, over the LAN event)


@ Itza

Yeah, after rereading my last post, I recalled the issue you keep poking is more or less 2 things that I don't think I covered. One being you see it as 1 game box offers all it's features to whom is ever in reach of your house/game disc. As your second is about this '1' feature not being worth buying additional copies.

Perhaps I should give up this mind set I could change your opinion that it's a reasonable decision on Blizzard's part...for even as clear as day as it makes sense to me, and possibly others, you just don't want to accept paying more for something you truly believe a one time payment covers. Whether it's a way to save what short comings of cash you or your siblings/friends have, or away to abuse(while not meaning too) the system for allowing such luxury in the past.

In short...if you plan to play a game with whom ever...if it requires multiple computers to par-take in the game/feature...I feel it's a fair gesture that each computer running the game is tied to a paid game box. That goes for however small the feature may be, and in this case...playing with others, off B.net or on it is arguably half if not more then the reason people play SC. (It's a big feature, and one people will buy the game over solely for that feature...clearly your view differs, yet your argument is over playing with others at the same time - so you crave the feature that you just don't want to pay extra to get/continue to use)

Blizzard knows that, even if single player is engaging and never bores for a certain sum, they know the multi-player community is why the majority of customers will buy SCII, and they don't want to let the abuses of LAN go this time around. (Ends up doing collateral damage, but for a price they feel is worth it - that's saying so without knowing fully their intentions to replace/lessen the loss of LAN)

 

Well I think the issue here is well it can be compared to most computer operating systems.

When you buy it you get a single user license so it can be installed on one computer. If you want it to be able to be installed on the whole families computers you have to buy the family license. And I think SC 2 is the same. You but it and for your estimated $100 per game you are getting a single license enabling you and you alone to play it online and whatever.

I do think Blizz could fix this by say selling a family license upgrade too. So for a little fee you could have up to 5 users from the same IP install it no their computers and use it. Then siblings could vs each other in multiplayer.

 

mmmkay....

offtopic but i was redirected to a warning page saying that the link (in the first post of the thread creator) is an attack site that contained malware

 

Yeah I noticed that now, thanks for the heads up. I am removing the bad link and replacing it with a better one if I find one.

 

i personally see a lot of info on B.Net 2 being announced at Blizzcon, or when they beta is released (hopefully this week or next)

 

We definitely are seeing a slight bit more and more Bnet 2.0 news flying around recently *With Rob Pardo's newest interview...*

It's safe to say that the news will be coming soon. I'd ASSUME in the coming weeks.

 

pshhh.... if blizz announced this way earlier, we wouldve seen moar rage from the gamers

blizz is taking a HUGE gamble not including LAN in sc2

even if no LAN is like saying "were preventing piracy"

i say "be more worried because the loss of support from gamers who enjoyed the game because it has LAN and they can play with their friends"

blizz is saying they want LAN parties to be obsolete, they want us to play with friends while were at home, not play friends in a centralized area like a computer shop...

1. Blizz dont want us to socialize and enjoy screaming and taunting while in a computer shop.
A comp shop wont subscribe to multiple internet connections just so they can have different connections to support having multiple B.net accounts logged in. A comp shop has only 1 or 2 net connections.

2. Blizz wants to appeal to many people my ass, they just lost the appeal of many gamers...
"Hey, im gonna buy sc2 and install it in my home so me and my brother can battle it out"
"Do you have an internet connection?"
"No"
"Youre screwed"



And to those whos saying that Hamachi or Garena is a workaround, you still need LAN to play using those

 

@ Ursawarrior

Putting words in Blizzard's mouth is fun, yet unfulfilled.

This may as well not be directed at you, but where ever I see a topic on new information about SC II - I see some crazed person rant and preach "NO LAN, suck my ____ Blizzard!" or some other obscenity.

This both 1) Makes me glad these people wont buy the game if such a option is not presented, and 2) Makes me a non-believer they wont buy the game regardless if it comes out with out a LAN feature.

Perhaps this is ignorance on my part, but I feel the number's predicted of people that don't have a internet connection, while not wanting to buy SC II due to lack of LAN is grossly over-exaggerated. As well the fact those with internet make or break their experience with lag is a stubborn attitude at best. ("I want the perfect game or I'm not buying!") -Good luck with being picky, we'll see what grand games come out of such mind sets.


And yet again, those few proud, yet un-wanted heroes go out of their way to not reason with blizzard, or wait for their response, but belly out insane threats and irrational claims with out knowing much else to do with their time in wait of the game's release.

oy vey

 

I realised I'd missed a post earlier on here. So, what with the multiple copies for siblings...

Buying a second copy of the game doesn't allow them to play multiplayer. They already can with a single CD, so it's not a problem. If I buy a single copy, my brother has every feature available to him that I have available to me. Again, the only thing that we can't do is play against each other, and that is the problem. That is the one feature that's restricted, and it's the only thing gained from buying another box, but it still has to be bought again in full to do. So it's not as simple as the second copy enables multiplayer, multiplayer is half the game, and half the game is worth buying a second copy. Multiplayer's already included, and it's available to both of us with the one box. Playing against each other specifically, on the other hand, is not.

As for the people complaining, that shouldn't be any support for the removal of LAN. It's like shutting off someone's electricity, and, when they inevitably get angry, saying they don't deserve electricity because they're complaining about it so much. While I definitely know how crude, mindless, shouting complainers don't really warrant any sympathy, it's no reason not to support LAN in StarCraft2.

 

Itza you missed the main point in my last post directed at you. The thing you keep saying is the only functionality between you and your sibling buying two games versus one (the ability to play together) is really a sub-piece of a much larger piece of funtcionality you are missing, and that is the ability to play online at the same time. You and your sibling can't play online at the same time with only one copy of the game with any RTS that has a cd-key. That functionality is why families buy more than one copy of most games. The only difference between SC1 and SC2 with regards to your problem is the ability to play with one siblings is being shifted from the LAN functionality of the game to the Battle.net functionality of the game. The reason you would buy more than one copy of the game is still the same; to play online with your family and friends at the same time.

@Ursa Blizzard has never prevented people with the same ip address from playing online at the same time (assuming everyone has a their own unique cd-key) in any of their games, ever. There is no reason for them to start now. As for the rest of your statements, if you really believe Blizzard is some evil dictator, why are you on a site dedicated to the disscussion of one of their games that isn't even out yet?

 

The inclusion of LAN doesn't affect that. To have two people playing on Battle.Net, you need two Battle.Net accounts, and to have two Battle.Net accounts, you need two CD keys. There's no argument there. I'm not saying siblings should be automatically given their own CD keys or anything, and the thing with LAN is that you have to have set it up so you can play with someone. It's not like Battle.Net, where you can just hop on and see what games there are to join.

I'm not saying that, in my purchase of StarCraft2, it should be that both me and my brother have our own copies. If you want several CD keys, you're going to need to buy several CD's. That's the way it's always been, and there's no way around that. They shouldn't, however, force people into that. It shouldn't cost them twice as much to be able to play each other. Even just with one-offs. I mean, who hasn't had a game with a mate who doesn't have StarCraft? Or WarCraft? Or Diablo? How are you going to do that with StarCraft2 unless you've bought a second copy? There's a big difference between wanting an extra CD key and wanting to play against a brother, sister or friend.

And as for the feature Blizzard's supposed to have instead of LAN, even if it's the best thing imaginable, such arguments and accusations are justified for them deliberately withholding the info after telling us it won't support LAN. They've obviously already developed a proper system, or know how they want it to eventually work, so if they're not actually going to tell us what's replacing LAN, I don't really see how anyone can object to any discussion or complaints, provided they aren't just rude like RT said before.

 

Itza let me preface this by saying in principle I do believe people should be able to have freinds over and play Sc2 without having to buy several copies for a one time expierence.

Assuming that is your goal where and how do you draw the line? Most features that allow for that expierence also allow for the game to be easily pirated and played by a large number of people. For example what stops someone from distributing hundreds of copies of Sc1 and then having everyone play over Hamachi? The answer is nothing and that is what some people do. This also holds true for any RTS as long as you can mount an ISO that circumvents the DRM. By removing LAN you can essentially prevent all of this until someone can mimick and host battle.net software (which is what happens when people pirate WoW), which is a substantially more difficult process than just breaking the DRM for something you have physical access to. By removing LAN we make it a lot easier to draw the line mentioned ealier, unfotunaetly it also prevents it from being used to achieve our goal. This doesn't mean the goal can't be reached though, I can think of a handful of ways to achieve our original goal through the use of Battle.net, just off the top of my head. Because of that I am not going to raise any pitchforks until I know more about Battle.net.

As for why more information about Battle.net here is my theory from an earlier post:

 

There's definitely a grey area. There's no question about that. In my opinion, the goal isn't to allow people to play over Hamachi and whatnot.

The goal should simply be to include LAN. Local area network, direct cable connection, no internet required, LAN. Now I'm anything but a tech wizard, as you've probably already seen by some mistake I've probably made just then, but Hamachi, and other similar programs I imagine, I'm not certain as I only use Hamachi despite having a legit copy of StarCraft1 and BroodWar, requires an internet connection with the UDP TCP/IP connection. Don't ask me what that means, I'm just saying what I see here. So, even in StarCraft1, simply removing the LAN UDP multiplayer option would, cracks aside, prevent a lot of people who don't have legitimate copies to play over Hamachi.

Surely if the only multiplayer options provided were Battle.Net and a direct cable LAN connection then people wouldn't be able to take advantage of programs such as Hamachi. If that's the case, Blizzard would still cut down on the number of pirates, LAN tournaments would be able to run without relying on an internet connection, LAN parties would still work and siblings would be able to play against each other.

Now I'm positive that there's some fundamental flaw with that a couple of paragraphs back, but I seriously don't see how having a LAN option means that people will be able to pirate it.

 

yeah I think there are some technical flaws about what you just wrote, but Im not sure. Any techwizards out there???

 

We had this discussion on Hiveworkshop once, all i have to say is that, if I want to play with my family I dont want to have to go out and get 4 other cd's for all of us to play together..

 

I understand the convenience of not having to purchase the other games to play with them...but...come on, you can't possibly tell me that it is how it should be in the eyes of the law/business man?

Could giving your brother a copy to play multiplayer *LAN or what have you* along side you be considered piracy? My gut instinct says "Yes"

 

I think what Itza want, as in free LAN for the whole family might be too much, but as he said your sibling shouldn't have to buy the game just to realize the whole SC2 thing wasn't his/her thing.

So: What if every box came with 1 - 5 free trials of sorts? I don't know how the technicalities would work but basically your siblings would have the full multiplayer (as in Bnet 2.0, I guess) for a decent number of weeks.

Having to buy another box after that isn't too much IMO. If your sibling couldn't get enough of the trial and wants more SC2, how's it wasted or badly spent money? It's a game that will last for years.

(I am sorry if anything I said has already been said, or clashed with something already established as I haven't read every post in this thread)

 

I really wouldent consider it piracy as piracy is stealing a game from a site such as Piratebay etc, we actually have four computers in our house =/
Im not sure if they could do that with B Net as they do WoW

 

@ Cyberpitz. You're forgetting that these people have complete access to the game already. Is it considered piracy if I buy the game but both me and my bro play the single player campaign? Or if both of us play on Battle.Net? Both of us have complete access to the game, the only thing missing being the ability to play against each other. That is the problem. It's not that, in me buying the game, my brother should get his own copy, it's that we both have access to everything, but we have to pay for two complete sets of StarCraft2 to be able to play against each other. That's unreasonable.

@ GMG. Basically, and that is an integral part of it, but again, the only thing that's actually being 'bought' in buying another copy of each box is the ability to play against each other. That's it. It's unreasonable to charge as much as the game itself costs, just for that feature.