101 replies to this topic

[TehKiller]

KiraSama, on 30 Jun 2009, 13:03, said:

CodeCat, on 30 Jun 2009, 11:57, said:

So in that sense, it actually promotes piracy since it's just giving people more of a reason to circumvent the game's limitations.

Basically, hell, its that hard to do it like in steam? you need to be conected online to battle.net but can play lan after conecting to it

Wouldnt that kill the whole point of LAN?

[Foxhound]

CodeCat, on 30 Jun 2009, 5:57, said:

So in that sense, it actually promotes piracy since it's just giving people more of a reason to circumvent the game's limitations.

People have already done the reverse of that with linked consoles for such things as the original Halo. It wouldn't surprise me if it was possible.

[Teron]

As I have already said, you can play over "LAN". You just join the game over the internet, thats all. And for that, you have to have a valid account

Edited by Teron, 30 June 2009 - 23:23.

[D.K.]

Blizzard is just provocating. Only thing they'll get is 90% of pirates, crackers & co. on their arses, burning and cracking every single copy of Starcraft 2 until CDs break into pieces inside their computer casings.

I'm totally not for pirates to break the hell out of that game. NOT!

[TehKiller]

Teron, on 1 Jul 2009, 0:23, said:

As I have already said, you can play over "LAN". You just join the game over the internet, thats all. And for that, you have to have a valid account

No you cant play over LAN because LAN is supposed to be offline connection.To need a internet connection to do this "LAN" of yours kills the whole point of LAN in the first place

[Ion Cannon!]

D.K., on 1 Jul 2009, 11:20, said:

Blizzard is just provocating. Only thing they'll get is 90% of pirates, crackers & co. on their arses, burning and cracking every single copy of Starcraft 2 until CDs break into pieces inside their computer casings.

I'm totally not for pirates to break the hell out of that game. NOT!

I can't see that many pirating just because it doesn't have LAN. Battlenet is a decent service and you can setup private games with a password so your not losing much. I mean come on, every game has broadband now anyway.

[D.K.]

Point taken. But still I'm not going to pay for something that lacks something fundamental in multiplayer section. I'd rather spend that money on buying myself a ticket to Australia.

[Teron]

TehKiller, on 1 Jul 2009, 13:02, said:

Teron, on 1 Jul 2009, 0:23, said:

As I have already said, you can play over "LAN". You just join the game over the internet, thats all. And for that, you have to have a valid account

No you cant play over LAN because LAN is supposed to be offline connection.To need a internet connection to do this "LAN" of yours kills the whole point of LAN in the first place

Please reread, what I already said earlier, again

[TehKiller]

Teron, on 1 Jul 2009, 14:31, said:

TehKiller, on 1 Jul 2009, 13:02, said:

Teron, on 1 Jul 2009, 0:23, said:

As I have already said, you can play over "LAN". You just join the game over the internet, thats all. And for that, you have to have a valid account

No you cant play over LAN because LAN is supposed to be offline connection.To need a internet connection to do this "LAN" of yours kills the whole point of LAN in the first place

Please reread, what I already said earlier, again

Please reread what I've said

[BeefJeRKy]

Guys if you're going to argue at least be grown up and provide proper arguments

Teron, on 29 Jun 2009, 21:13, said:

Besides, you will still be able to play Starcraft 2 over "LAN", because even now when you play a game over battlenet (e.g. Warcraft 3), you'll get directly connected to these persons computer.
I might even say, you can take all your friend's computers, wire them together via a router, login (with each) to battlenet and join a selfmade custom game. After joining your game, you can cut the internet connection, because all are playing in the same network in which the router does all the routing. So no problem here (= no lag at all)

From what I see here, Teron mentioned that one needs an internet connection for the game to be setup then the router will habdle all the connections and the internet can be removed from the equation but still, this isn't a proper implimentation of LAN. This will really kill any chances of it being setup up in net cafes here though this is a good thing since the majority here get pirated games from Syria anyway.

[CJ]

That's one more stupid idea from the game makers, adding limitations such as this one won't stop pirates, there was already a LAN patch for Left 4 Dead when the game didn't support that function plus another one for playing RA3 campaign on LAN Coop so I don't believe this will stop pirates, the only guys who'll lose are the fans as always...

[Teron]

Carl, on 1 Jul 2009, 18:11, said:

That's one more stupid idea from the game makers, adding limitations such as this one won't stop pirates, there was already a LAN patch for Left 4 Dead when the game didn't support that function plus another one for playing RA3 campaign on LAN Coop so I don't believe this will stop pirates, the only guys who'll lose are the fans as always...

Why would they loose fans, when you still can play it with friends in ONE room? This doesn't make any sense. The only thing you have to have is an internet connection. After that, you'll get directly connected to your friends (you will be in the same network) and thus, there's the LAN you wanted

Quote

No you cant play over LAN because LAN is supposed to be offline connection.To need a internet connection to do this "LAN" of yours kills the whole point of LAN in the first place

And why if I may ask? Bring all your friends PCs to your home, connect to the Internet (and thus validate your installation) and enjoy your LAN party after joining a game which you or one of your friends created. Thats what I meant of reread my post.

EDIT: Oh and if you didn't know it: Diablo 3 will also have NO direct LAN option.

Edited by Teron, 01 July 2009 - 20:32.

[CJ]

Teron, on 1 Jul 2009, 21:44, said:

Carl, on 1 Jul 2009, 18:11, said:

That's one more stupid idea from the game makers, adding limitations such as this one won't stop pirates, there was already a LAN patch for Left 4 Dead when the game didn't support that function plus another one for playing RA3 campaign on LAN Coop so I don't believe this will stop pirates, the only guys who'll lose are the fans as always...

Why would they loose fans, when you still can play it with friends in ONE room? This doesn't make any sense. The only thing you have to have is an internet connection. After that, you'll get directly connected to your friends (you will be in the same network) and thus, there's the LAN you wanted

I'm not talking about this case for the fans' suffering
And don't forget that LAN parties are far better than internet ones where you can't see your friends

[KiraSama]

Teron, on 1 Jul 2009, 21:44, said:

And why if I may ask? Bring all your friends PCs to your home, connect to the Internet (and thus validate your installation) and enjoy your LAN party after joining a game which you or one of your friends created. Thats what I meant of reread my post.

EDIT: Oh and if you didn't know it: Diablo 3 will also have NO direct LAN option.

Because if we are going to play online between us online we rather play each one in they houses

what you are defending as "lan" is basically picking two tvs, put them against each other sides, play a game on xbox live and say: "see you can play this game in split screen!"

Quote

Wouldnt that kill the whole point of LAN?

not kinda, you just go online to show you have a valid cdkey, but playing is between lan conection

[Sasori_Zero]

So this could (and most likely will) dictate the actual life span of Starcraft IIs multiplayer which is honestly , very short sighted on the developers part. Mainly because games like Starcraft and Tiberian Sun have enjoyed such long life spans due to internet playability and (in TS case) very open modding.

We can just pray that it (Starcraft II) will last long without such a feature of Direct LAN.

Unless it supports third party servers.

Edited by Sasori_Zero, 02 July 2009 - 00:42.

[Ion Cannon!]

I really don't see why not including LAN support is such a bad thing. You can still play with your friends over battle-net.

Your making a mountain of a molehill. LAN support would not in any way increase SC2's playability or its multiplayer lifespan. Whats more Blizzard support their games for long periods, you can still play D2 and SC on Battlenet a decade after they were released.

Edited by Ion Cannon!, 02 July 2009 - 01:06.

[Sasori_Zero]

Ion Cannon!, on 2 Jul 2009, 2:04, said:

I really don't see why not including LAN support is such a bad thing. You can still play with your friends over battle-net.

Your making a mountain of a molehill. LAN support would not in any way increase SC2's playability or its multiplayer lifespan. Whats more Blizzard support their games for long periods, you can still play D2 and SC on Battlenet a decade after they were released.

Making a general statement. We are just lucky that Blizzard supports its game for such long periods.

Although D2 and SC are popular in most senses and still enjoy the large interest of their fanbases.

Hamper Playability? When did I say it would hamper overall playability? I am just refering to multiplayer taking some hits from people who do not want to register to a site for a server to play through. Although it depends on the reliability of the server (which i'm sure is good) and the stability of the engine to handle online play (which should also be good)

it sounds like you took my comment a bit seriously.

[RaiDK]

90% of lan parties use non-legit software anyway, so there's really no point arguing against this...

[Teron]

Sasori_Zero, on 2 Jul 2009, 2:40, said:

So this could (and most likely will) dictate the actual life span of Starcraft IIs multiplayer which is honestly , very short sighted on the developers part. Mainly because games like Starcraft and Tiberian Sun have enjoyed such long life spans due to internet playability and (in TS case) very open modding.

We can just pray that it (Starcraft II) will last long without such a feature of Direct LAN.

Unless it supports third party servers.

Blizzard isn't stupid, I think they know exactly what has given Starcraft its longevity and if they aren't even considering supporting LAN right now, I'm guessing they don't think it's LAN capability. Thing is, why LAN was used that much back then: There was nothing better than LAN. Internet sucked those times with all its 14k modem users and many people didnt even have internet. They were just playing LAN with friends and such.

[Ion Cannon!]

Sasori_Zero, on 2 Jul 2009, 5:17, said:

Ion Cannon!, on 2 Jul 2009, 2:04, said:

I really don't see why not including LAN support is such a bad thing. You can still play with your friends over battle-net.

Your making a mountain of a molehill. LAN support would not in any way increase SC2's playability or its multiplayer lifespan. Whats more Blizzard support their games for long periods, you can still play D2 and SC on Battlenet a decade after they were released.

Making a general statement. We are just lucky that Blizzard supports its game for such long periods.

Although D2 and SC are popular in most senses and still enjoy the large interest of their fanbases.

Hamper Playability? When did I say it would hamper overall playability? I am just refering to multiplayer taking some hits from people who do not want to register to a site for a server to play through. Although it depends on the reliability of the server (which i'm sure is good) and the stability of the engine to handle online play (which should also be good)

it sounds like you took my comment a bit seriously.

I didn't take your comment seriously I took it - and alot of other stupid comments, at face value.

Why on earth would people be against signing up on battlenet? The only people who want LAN and don't want to signup to battlenet will be people who haven't got the game legitimately anyway.

Getting rid of LAN seems like a good anti-piracy measure to me, and it doesn't harm the gamers or criminalise them like DRM would.

[RaiDK]

^^ Agreed. The only people who would use LAN are the people who download it and play it over hamachi or the people who acquire a copy and give it to all their friends for a lan party.

Neither of which is legal, I might add.

[TehKiller]

Actually the latter is more than legal (but then again I dont know all of the ridicilous laws in Australia)

Edited by TehKiller, 02 July 2009 - 13:56.

[Teron]

TehKiller, on 2 Jul 2009, 15:56, said:

Actually the latter is more than legal (but then again I dont know all of the ridicilous laws in Australia)

So handing out your bought copy to your friends to install and crack it is legal. Think again!

[TehKiller]

Actually even in your example it is legal. Cracking a game is legal selling one aint.

[Ion Cannon!]

No no, cracking a game is ONLY legal if you own a legitimate copy yourself.