| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nisshoku
   |
Posted - 2009.06.30 19:09:00 -
[1]
FFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
I wonder if this is Blizzard's decision or Activision is at work pulling the strings because it seems to me that they have not been that worried about piracy before. The original starcraft even came with a spawn feature to allow you to play LAN games with friends who didn't have the game. Granted this was way before piracy reached the prevalence that it is at today but it is still ****es me off that they're doing this.
|
Madam Scarlette
Caldari
Knights of Destruction
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 19:23:00 -
[2]
seems like a bad call to me |
Felix Viator
Capital Ships Inc.
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 19:32:00 -
[3]
I agree a very foolish decision. I was going to buy it for the ability to play online, when not using it for the primary purpose... gaming with friends at LAN parties.
Since the game will no longer fulfill it primary purpose, I am sadly going to have to pass... unless someone cracks to enable/spoof lan play as they probably will.
|
NeoNeTiC
LOCKDOWN.
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 19:34:00 -
[4]
That's just... stunning, given that SC tournaments in Korea (which makes up the biggest country-based usergroup) used LAN to cut down on latency, which was really required for the fast paced input-management they keep up.
Now they say "**** professional e-sports" by forcing people to conenct from home -> b.net -> home to play a 1v1 from the same building. 
I could've understood (partially atleast) enforcing an online cd-key check to then play a LAN game (like Steam) but dropping support entirely is just horrible.
Can't say how likely it is but I bet there will be a b.net local client some day that circumvents online connection anways. :S
I also fail to see how dropping LAN support cuts down on piracy. You're either going to buy the game and have the key or you don't play it in multiplayer anyways. Or you just "borrow"/buy the account from someone else at greatly reduced price and play over b.net, yay.  The amount of "I pirate to play over LAN"-guys can't be that high.
Speaking of Battle.net: You can merge game-accounts from Blizzard products into a so called "Battle.net account". It's great fun to see people whine about "all their WoW accs" getting "hacked" (because they visited some goldseller site or stuff) and then receive warning e-mails about botting/hacking/spam/gold trade times the number of accounts they had. Now imagine you have SC I, SC 2, WoW, Diablo 2, Diablo 3 some day and all these sub-accounts get abused for goldseller/maphack/whatever spam - makes creation of own accounts to spam redudant.
Feels like someone didn't think that through. 
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 20:01:00 -
[5]
Sounds like the best anti-piracy measure they could think of 
EVE issues|Mining revamp|Build stuff|Make ISK |
Epegi Givo
Amarr
Moral Equivalent Of War
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 20:02:00 -
[6]
you know, you could just make an online server and set a password so only your friends can join in.
-------------------------------------
My other alt is a Ferrari
|
EnslaverOfMinmatar
Amarr
Viziam
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 20:09:00 -
[7]
starcraft is irrelevant, all that matters is Diablo III
uʍop ǝpısdn ǝɹnʇɐuƃıs ʎɯ ƃuıpɐǝɹ ǝɹɐ noʎ
|
rValdez5987
Amarr
Imperial Guard.
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 20:25:00 -
[8]
MOTHER OF GOD.
I think the worlds gonna end soon.
No one is THAT STUPID, and yet they apparently are.
How disappointing. And this coming from a guy who has a wireless lan that covers his entire house with wired routers specifically for a nice big Lan. |
Rawr Cristina
Caldari
Liberi Fatalius
Exalted.
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 20:35:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Rawr Cristina on 30/06/2009 20:38:08
Oh wow. Words just don't do this justice
I'm sure all those dirty pirates have a reason to buy the game now. Yup, their sales can only go up. Only pirates play LAN anyway right? 
- Contagious - |
Zakarazor
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 20:37:00 -
[10]
...stupid mistake it may be but it wont stop anyone from buying the game. so...meh.
|
FOl2TY8
Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 21:12:00 -
[11]
 Originally by: rValdez5987
MOTHER OF GOD.
I think the worlds gonna end soon.
No one is THAT STUPID, and yet they apparently are.
Yes valdez, the decision of Blizzard to not allow LAN play is going to end the world.
Originally by: rValdez5987
How disappointing. And this coming from a guy who has a wireless lan that covers his entire house with wired routers specifically for a nice big Lan.
This sentence makes no sense. Please tell me how you're wireless network works with multiple hardlined routers. In fact tell me how your wired network works with multiple routers.
----------
This post brought to you by the worst PVP'er in Eve |
Thuranni
ffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 21:14:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Zakarazor
...stupid mistake it may be but it wont stop anyone from buying the game. so...meh.
I bought WC3 and it's expansion exclusively to play on lans with friends. I was going to buy SC2 to do the same. Now I won't.
|
Dibblah San
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 21:26:00 -
[13]
I don't know if this will stop me buying it, possibly, but it's certainly got to be something most people will consider before purchasing.
Will it stop being pirated?
I don't think it will make any difference.
|
Bestofworst
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 22:44:00 -
[14]
That means we have to play on fail.net?
grrr
----
My Music |
Great Artista
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 23:05:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Akita T
Sounds like the best anti-piracy measure they could think of
____
Rockets need a boost. CCP status:
[_] Told.
[x] Not told.
◕◡◕
|
Atomos Darksun
Damage Incorporated.
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 23:39:00 -
[16]
K, going to pirate SC2 now just to prove a point.
Doing the same with Diablo 3 if they don't allow TCP/IP connections.
Originally by: Amoxin
My vent is talking to me in a devil voice...
Non EVE related content removed from signature. Zymurgist |
rValdez5987
Amarr
Imperial Guard.
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 00:05:00 -
[17]
Edited by: rValdez5987 on 01/07/2009 00:08:53
Originally by: FOl2TY8
Originally by: rValdez5987
MOTHER OF GOD.
I think the worlds gonna end soon.
No one is THAT STUPID, and yet they apparently are.
Yes valdez, the decision of Blizzard to not allow LAN play is going to end the world.
Originally by: rValdez5987
How disappointing. And this coming from a guy who has a wireless lan that covers his entire house with wired routers specifically for a nice big Lan.
This sentence makes no sense. Please tell me how you're wireless network works with multiple hardlined routers. In fact tell me how your wired network works with multiple routers.
LRN2SARCASM
**** your stupid. lol
also, the other sentence was speedily typed. What I meant was I run multiple wireless access points and wireless routers and the wireless routers have 4 wired connections on them as well.
My house is a great place for a large lan, so this news disapoints me. |
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 00:13:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Akita T
Sounds like the best anti-piracy measure they could think of
Yet still someone will just set up his own battle.net sub-server and people will use it instead (not like it never happened in the past).
|
Felix Viator
Capital Ships Inc.
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 18:41:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Atomos Darksun
K, going to pirate SC2 now just to prove a point.
Doing the same with Diablo 3 if they don't allow TCP/IP connections.
Same here. No way i am buying it, this is insulting.
|
FOl2TY8
Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 19:18:00 -
[20]
Originally by: rValdez5987
LRN2SARCASM
**** your stupid. lol
also, the other sentence was speedily typed. What I meant was I run multiple wireless access points and wireless routers and the wireless routers have 4 wired connections on them as well.
My house is a great place for a large lan, so this news disapoints me.
It would not surprise me if you weren't being sarcastic at all. You're the whiniest bitch on these forums so it would definitely be par for the course.
That's cool about the LAN though. Now all you need is friends.
----------
This post brought to you by the worst PVP'er in Eve |
Cikulisuy
Amarr
Damage Incorporated.
|
Posted - 2009.07.02 01:46:00 -
[21]
mutilating and breaking your own product encourages people to buy it c/d?
i give it 2 weeks before a hacked DRM free lan-capable copy comes out on a pirate site. or at least a non-blizzard battle.net....
pirating.. ****ing insulting
nub> you cant mine so you kill. |
Knopje
|
Posted - 2009.07.02 03:38:00 -
[22]
I was looking forward to this, thanks for making my decision for me Blizzard. I don't care how 'polished' this is but no LAN is pure stupidity.
Blame piracy all you want but, in the end, it's the failure of companies that is encouraging it. Who in their right mind would pay for half-finished, bud riddled games that are barely playable and have been redone over and over again over the past two decades? I made the mistake of buying GTA IV because I'm a GTA fan but that's the last Rockstar game I buy and COD V is a disgrace too, I regret buying it.
But beware, this whole Battlenet push is because Blizzard have made it clear they want to make it a paid service. They can claim whatever they want now but when every single one of their users is attached to it they will force people to pay. Imagine 11 million WoW players paying to use Bnet, Blizzard are drooling over that idea.
|
Pan Crastus
Anti-Metagaming League
|
Posted - 2009.07.02 10:13:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Nisshoku
FFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Think about all the extra PR/buzz they are getting by doing this and then backing down a bit later... Excellent decision.
How to PVP: 1. buy ISK with GTCs, 2. fit cloak, learn aggro mechanics, 3. buy second account for metagaming
|
Jhagiti Tyran
Mortis Angelus
|
Posted - 2009.07.02 12:14:00 -
[24]
Originally by: NeoNeTiC
I also fail to see how dropping LAN support cuts down on piracy.
A lot of people who pirate RTS games use VPN software like Hamachi to play multiplayer games over the internet quickly and easily enough for non tech savvy players, a lack of LAN support might be an attempt to discourage causal pirates who want to play the game in multiplayer mode.
-
|
Don Jehova
Gallente
x13
|
Posted - 2009.07.02 12:15:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Don Jehova on 02/07/2009 12:16:38
They have also gone out, called iccup a pirate server (one of the only reasons sc1 still sell copies). Way to **** of the hardcore fans.
I doo think the gaming community will have to get use to the no lan idea in games, as direct response lan "abuse" in the form of hamachi and similar products.
Im still going to buy i think. Had lots of fun with wc3 over bnet. They just have make sure its a solid product, maybe start looking in to some of the very excelent latency reduction third party software like listchecker (yes i know this is using lan/vpn tunnel, but it gives such a low latency they need use somthing similar)
|
5pinDizzy
|
Posted - 2009.07.04 15:37:00 -
[26]
Looks like it'll be best to wait for the pirated version of Starcraft 2 folks.
Seems it'll be a superior product as it'll most likely be cracked to have LAN.
|
Cpt Placeholder
|
Posted - 2009.07.04 15:47:00 -
[27]
You can't "crack" something to enable a functionality that does not exist.
LAN play will be possible through server emulators once some people bother to make them.
No-LAN was certainly Blizzards decision, it's in their best interest as a company to get all of their clients onto their new Battle.net and it has certainly little to do with piracy.
|
5pinDizzy
|
Posted - 2009.07.04 15:57:00 -
[28]
I read they are planning to have a sort of LAN anyway eventually, just that it's going to be built into battlenet so you'd have to log in to play LAN.
|
Kazuma Saruwatari
|
Posted - 2009.07.04 16:29:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Akita T
Sounds like the best anti-piracy measure they could think of
sadly /seconded. All we can hope for for SC2 Lan support is if the entirety of South Korea's cybergaming community basically bash down Blizzard's doors demanding it.
-
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |