Starcraft 2 - No Lan Support
  • GovernorGovernor August 2009
    Blizzard has made it clear that they have no intention of providing LAN support for Starcraft 2. They are completely revamping battle.net (the whole system... not just the UI) so it will be significantly more interactive and useful, and they want battle.net to be the exclusive means to play multiplayer. They have also made it clear that this is an attempt to fight piracy.

    What do you guys think?
  • fratersangfratersang August 2009
    battle net has always been awful...so I hope they know what they are doing :-/

  • NunesNunes August 2009
    QUOTE (fratersang @ Aug 22 2009, 02:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    battle net has always been awful...so I hope they know what they are doing :-/


    The way they're talking it sounds like they are either pretty confident or completely willing to gamble on low numbers of users. The latter would be dumber than I'd like to think Blizzard is.

    I don't mind this move too much. I have every intention of buying the first installment of this game, and it's always been a bitch to pirate Blizzard games anyway, IMO. The only reasons to bitch are:
    1. you want to steal it and this makes that harder
    or
    2. the system isn't robust enough to handle us.

    I'll withhold judgment until I see how they're doing.
  • cutchinscutchins August 2009
    why should we have to log into battle.net to play against someone who's in the same room?
  • NunesNunes August 2009
    QUOTE (CJ. @ Aug 22 2009, 04:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    why should we have to log into battle.net to play against someone who's in the same room?


    No good reason. But then again, how many people are playing starcraft, let alone starcraft 2 on LAN anyway? I did that maybe twice, even when people were in the same room. We'd go online and play together on BNet. This won't effect my online play one iota.

    why is logging into battlenet necessarily a bad thing?
  • GovernorGovernor August 2009
    Well for one, we couldn't have a full in-house LAN game without serious lag spikes.

    I guess my beef is that they are telling me how to play their game (I must utilize all the extra battle.net crap) or they are hindering my game playing so that they can crack down on piracy. That's crap.

    Valve did a fantastic job with steam; games are still tied into your account to prevent piracy, but you can also still play games offline. It can be done; blizzard is choosing not to do it.
  • NunesNunes August 2009
    QUOTE (Governor @ Aug 22 2009, 05:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    Well for one, we couldn't have a full in-house LAN game without serious lag spikes.

    I guess my beef is that they are telling me how to play their game (I must utilize all the extra battle.net crap) or they are hindering my game playing so that they can crack down on piracy. That's crap.

    Valve did a fantastic job with steam; games are still tied into your account to prevent piracy, but you can also still play games offline. It can be done; blizzard is choosing not to do it. has been slowly and unsurprisingly chugging in this direction while everyone pays them 15 bucks a month to eat their lives for some time now.


    I suppose we could play a 15 to 20 man game of starcraft... we never would... but I guess we could have if they let us.
  • GovernorGovernor August 2009
    I believe 6 v 6 is the largest game available. I didn't mean we would get every single person at the LAN playing (that would never happen anyway), I meant we would fill a full game on LAN. For example, we consistently fill dota games on LAN... we will not be able to do this on SC2.
  • ohaiohai August 2009
    fuck blizzard and the horse they fucked and rode in on
  • KPKP August 2009
    I think this is a poor choice indeed. As Gov said, the Steam format is wonderful and doing a great job supporting organized online play, protecting game makers by registering, and having a great way to buy games. I how Steam lets you have your games anywhere you are, and I don't think a lot of people take advantage of the system(I assume there are ways but I haven't really seen anyone do it).

    Maybe Blizzard is making a really great system and it will all work out. Does anyone remember when Steam was first introduced. I remember I was a Freshman in college and my friends and I were really pissed..it made everything laggy and the system seemed like the were taking over my game...and look how it turned out.

    I don't really understand why they will not allow LAN play. First off all, no one who is pirating the game just to play on a LAN was going to buy the game in the first place. Maybe by letting people play it on LANs the person that WASN'T going to buy the game, finds out that it is really awesome, and then buys it! Having your customers playing games on a LAN I believe can only help them sell more copies!

    As someone else said in this thread, Blizzard games were a bitch to pirate in the first place, I don't see a need to make it harder by taking out a FULL part of the game.

    I guess Blizzard knows that they make amazing games, and everyone wants SC2 so they can do what they want and get away with it, because I know i'll still buy it(if I have a pc that will run it).
  • romerashromerash August 2009
    people will find tunnelers/ bnet emulators ... so no worry about that
  • NunesNunes August 2009
    QUOTE (Governor @ Aug 22 2009, 07:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    I believe 6 v 6 is the largest game available. I didn't mean we would get every single person at the LAN playing (that would never happen anyway), I meant we would fill a full game on LAN. For example, we consistently fill dota games on LAN... we will not be able to do this on SC2.


    This is true I suppose.

    There's no good reason to exclude LAN play, really. But being told how to play the game you bought and paid for is not surprising to me in the least.

    I'm much more upset by the fact that they announced the 3 game split AFTER I dropped my $5 pre-order... Bitch move, meet bitcher move.
  • ErlingErling August 2009
    Hm, every new thing I've been hearing is they are now saying that with the insane outcry over this they're looking into getting it into the game.

    I surprisingly, couldn't care less.
  • romerashromerash August 2009
    the main reason they dont want lan is to prevent people from just getting cracked versions and playing in lans together
  • KPKP August 2009
    QUOTE (romerash @ Aug 24 2009, 07:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    the main reason they dont want lan is to prevent people from just getting cracked versions and playing in lans together


    How many people LAN everyday? Is that really enough to take something out of the game. One office playing SC3 after work on their LAN is really going to hurt them...its not going to make at least one of them go home and buy a copy?

This discussion has been closed.
← All Discussions

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Apply for Membership