Blizzard: Lack of StarCraft LAN "No Big Deal"

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
Blizzard: Lack of StarCraft LAN "No Big Deal"



Blizzard is all too aware of the outrage sparked from its controversial decision to omit LAN support from StarCraft 2, but VP of Game Design Rob Pardo thinks that once the game is out, people will realize that the omission is really "no big deal."

Speaking with Kotaku's Mike Fahey this weekend at BlizzCon [http://kotaku.com/5343640/blizzard-lack-of-starcraft-lan-is-no-big-deal], Blizzard's executive vice president of game design, Rob Pardo, was asked to comment on the community outrage erupting from the lack of LAN support in the upcoming StarCraft 2 - an outrage that has spawned a 100,000-signature-strong petition.

Pardo indicated that the PC developer was very aware of the issue, joking that they were only continuing to get flack "[F]rom you guys. Only from the press. Everyone else has accepted it." Turning serious, Pardo acknowledged that the flack would likely continue until the game was released, but said that he believed that time and history would be on Blizzard's side - once people actually got their hands on the game and the new Battle.net, it wouldn't be a problem anymore.

[blockquote]Everyone is going to give us flack until it's out. None of us is going to know how big a deal it is until it's out. We believe that it's really not that big of a deal - that most people are not really going to notice that it's missing. There's a lot of people out there I think that are just afraid that they're suddenly not going to be able to connect to the internet tonight and they won't be able to play. I actually think that case is extremely rare, and I think we're going to be okay.[/blockquote]

"Extremely rare"? Well yeah, that's something that I can agree with - but doesn't that mean that such a case will exist?

Wait, what's this? Hang on a minute, don't break out the tar and feathers just yet. What about those few "extremely rare" cases where direct connectivity will be problematic, if not impossible? Pardo says that the company won't leave them out in the cold:

"There's a few legitimate cases that we're going to try and address over time. Location-based tournaments, or let's say I'm in a dorm with a firewall or something like that, hopefully there's a way to determine that and maybe start a peer-to-peer game."

This leaves me wondering what the SC2 machines on the BlizzCon floor were running on. When I mopped the floor with Keane, I didn't notice so much as the tiniest bit of latency - so if the game was running via Battle.net, then that'd be a good thing. If it was running on a LAN, then... well, I have no idea what exactly that would indicate, but it'd sure as hell be confusing.

Either way, neither we nor Blizzard have any way of knowing how the dropping of LAN functionality will affect the game until it comes out. Pardo is probably right in that it won't be a deal-breaker for the vast majority of gamers (really, when was the last time any of us had a genuine LAN party? This is an office full of gamers, and we couldn't find anyone who's LANned recently) but even so, time will be the only judge of this.

In any case, it's almost becoming overkill for this poor dead horse. Can we go back to complaining about the colors in Diablo III already?

Permalink
 

Robert632

New member
May 11, 2009
3,870
0
0
it seems like a very underused feature, almost like a gimmick. but i can see how people will be pissed.
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
When I mopped the floor with Keane
Video or it didn't happen! Preferably with The Emperor (the shoutcast commentator, not Palpatine) commentating.

Can we go back to complaining about the colors in Diablo III already?
Needs more rainbows.

Interesting that you had no latency at BlizzCon. Now all they have to do is release it so I can see it for myself.
 

Anachronism

New member
Apr 9, 2009
1,842
0
0
CantFaketheFunk said:
Pardo is probably right in that it won't be a deal-breaker for the vast majority of gamers
Well, obviously. No matter how much they complain, people aren't going to choose to not buy this game because of the absence of LAN. No matter how much they hate the fact that it's not there, SC2 will still probably end up being one of the biggest-selling PC games of all time. It's like the Star Wars fans who complain about the changes made in the Special Editions: they go on and on about how much they hate them, and yet they buy them all anyway. Much the same thing will happen here, I have no doubt. The 100 000 people who've signed that petition aren't going to boycott SC2.
 

Destal

New member
Jul 8, 2009
522
0
0
Blizzard has yet to let me down, I'll continue believing that until proven otherwise. We'll see once the game is released.
 

Croaker42

New member
Feb 5, 2009
818
0
0
Eh no more point in bitching as a gaming community, the protest has done all it can do.
Now it comes down to people actually refusing to buy the game. I doubt that will happen.
Hell even I will buy it eventually. (After the price drops and all three releases come in one box.)
 

Doctor Panda

New member
Apr 17, 2008
244
0
0
I lanned not two weeks ago. It's not an uncommon thing at all. Probably stems from the fact I play a lot of older games and the internet in my region is so shocking I'm unable to support even two players online at once.

Well, it's not going to matter in the long run anyway. Some crazy Chinese dude will have a work-around up within a few months of release.
 

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
Anachronism said:
CantFaketheFunk said:
Pardo is probably right in that it won't be a deal-breaker for the vast majority of gamers
Well, obviously. No matter how much they complain, people aren't going to choose to not buy this game because of the absence of LAN. No matter how much they hate the fact that it's not there, SC2 will still probably end up being one of the biggest-selling PC games of all time. It's like the Star Wars fans who complain about the changes made in the Special Editions: they go on and on about how much they hate them, and yet they buy them all anyway. Much the same thing will happen here, I have no doubt. The 100 000 people who've signed that petition aren't going to boycott SC2.
It doesn't hurt that SC2 is completely awesome, either.
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
I happen to be one of the "few rare cases"

I can barely get on xbox live and PSN, and steam is a massive pain in the ass with all the updates.

How they intend to make it so I can play with friends in the same room and not lag will be interesting.

On my internet, if 2 people tries to surf the web the internet slows to a crawl.

God I hate Vermont, nothing faster than "speedy" dial-up speed internet connections are supported in my area. A company said they would be bringing DSL, but now they are going bankrupt.
 

Kross

World Breaker
Sep 27, 2004
854
0
0
Pardo said:
We believe that it's really not that big of a deal - that most people are not really going to notice that it's missing.
Pardo said:
"...hopefully there's a way to determine [if people are hosting a location-based tournament] and maybe start a peer-to-peer game."
We're not going to have LAN capability, but if people are in a situation where they would actually want LAN capability, we'll maybe make the LAN work.

I'm so confused.
 

Syntax Error

New member
Sep 7, 2008
2,323
0
0
If Blizz follows through with this "lag-free" (face it, the only way the No-LAN setup would be viable is if online play has virtually no lag at all) B-net, they would be holding the technology to the best online gaming platform so far.
 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
19,638
4,442
118
Translation: All those complainey pants are gonna buy it anyway so, who cares?
 

300lb. Samoan

New member
Mar 25, 2009
1,765
0
0
It's easy for people who live in good coverage areas and can afford good service to say that poor connectivity is "extremely rare", but I live in Columbus OH, a rather larger midwest city with good services and me and my friends still have frequent internet problems, both with consistent quality and connection outages. A friend of mine recently moved out of the city to smaller Sunbery and he can hardly ever play with us, he's always calling and cancelling saying "sorry, internet died again..." BLIZZARD - PLEASE CONSIDER ALL OF YOUR CONSUMERS
 

SharedProphet

New member
Oct 9, 2008
181
0
0
Of course it won't bother the people who buy the game anyway. But then, there will be people who won't buy the game specifically because of its lack of LAN play.

Obviously LAN play is already implemented. They are using it for demo purposes at conventions. LAN play is easier to implement than Battle.net. The only reason it won't be in the game is because they want to hamstring the game to "prevent piracy." WoW can't really be pirated because it's online at all times. ActiBlizz is trying to make all Blizzard games like that now, even if there is no actual benefit to the customer (MMO experiences can't really be duplicated in single-player games, so there is a benefit for WoW, but not for games like D3 and SC2). I wonder if you will even be able to play single-player offline... the way things are going, I doubt it.

Customers will object, and there will be those who will not buy the game because of this. We'll just have to wait and see how significant it truly turns out to be. Hint: the customers decide whether or not it's a big deal, not Rob Pardo, Bobby Kotick, Blizzard, or Activision-Blizzard.

Oh yeah, and don't be surprised when Kotick prices the game and each of its expansions extra campaigns at $75.
 

kawligia

New member
Feb 24, 2009
779
0
0
Without LAN I will not even consider buying this game.

I am not a huge Starcraft fan but I do like playing it with my friends at a LAN. If I can't do that, then they will get no money from me or my friends. End of story.
 

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
SharedProphet said:
Of course it won't bother the people who buy the game anyway. But then, there will be people who won't buy the game specifically because of its lack of LAN play.

Obviously LAN play is already implemented. They are using it for demo purposes at conventions. LAN play is easier to implement than Battle.net. The only reason it won't be in the game is because they want to hamstring the game to "prevent piracy." WoW can't really be pirated because it's online at all times. ActiBlizz is trying to make all Blizzard games like that now, even if there is no actual benefit to the customer (MMO experiences can't really be duplicated in single-player games, so there is a benefit for WoW, but not for games like D3 and SC2). I wonder if you will even be able to play single-player offline... the way things are going, I doubt it.

Customers will object, and there will be those who will not buy the game because of this. We'll just have to wait and see how significant it truly turns out to be. Hint: the customers decide whether or not it's a big deal, not Rob Pardo, Bobby Kotick, Blizzard, or Activision-Blizzard.

Oh yeah, and don't be surprised when Kotick prices the game and each of its expansions extra campaigns at $75.
Singleplayer will have an offline mode, they confirmed it at BlizzCon.

And Kotick has no say in the pricing. I'd say 30-40 for the expansions - which is what they are officially referring to them as.
 

CyberKnight

New member
Jan 29, 2009
244
0
0
Seems to me that people who are willing to put together their own network to play a game together would be some of the biggest fans of the game. The fact that Blizzard would write these people off in favor of their need for control says a lot about them -- and what it's saying isn't particularly nice.
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
WoW can't really be pirated because it's online at all times.
What, you've not heard of WoW Private Servers? WoW's been pirated across the internet. Sure, it's not the same experience as the legitimate game, but it's been pirated nonetheless.