Because everywhere in the world has 100% dependable, high-speed Internet, of course!SirSchmoopy said:
No, wait, that's not at all the case.
Thousands Sign StarCraft 2 Petition
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
No, wait, that's not at all the case.
Bleh, I doubt Activison will listen... or they might, but you'll have to pay around £5 for LAN mode, I bet. If they can't milk money from it, Activison don't care.
Personally, I don't care about LAN, or even Bnet, I just want the single player, although I hear something about it being broken into episodes for the sake of pumping more money out of me.... yeah, great, thanks for trying to kill the industry Activison.
EDIT:
Come to think of it, how the hell did Activison buy out Blizzard in the first place? Surely WoW alone would make them unaffordable, and give them a right to print money.
Personally, I don't care about LAN, or even Bnet, I just want the single player, although I hear something about it being broken into episodes for the sake of pumping more money out of me.... yeah, great, thanks for trying to kill the industry Activison.
EDIT:
Come to think of it, how the hell did Activison buy out Blizzard in the first place? Surely WoW alone would make them unaffordable, and give them a right to print money.
Firstly, nothing, and I do mean absolutely NOTHING, justifies splitting a game up like they are with SC2. It's a cash grab, pure, simple, end of discussion.
Second, I cannot help feeling like, as usual with such petitions, things will fall on deaf ears here. I'm with so many of you on LAN SC, it was part of why I got my very first PC (sweet Pentium II with bleeding edge voodoo, baby!!!) and I think trying to "Trojan horse" Battle.net into popularity this way will only cause customers to resent them.
All said, Actiblizzion is a behemoth with obscene amounts of money and near unparalleled industry presence. I sincerely doubt they will change their minds if a million signed this petition, because a devoted fan-base of millions and South freaking Korea say that no matter what they do, this game will probably sell in record numbers.
Second, I cannot help feeling like, as usual with such petitions, things will fall on deaf ears here. I'm with so many of you on LAN SC, it was part of why I got my very first PC (sweet Pentium II with bleeding edge voodoo, baby!!!) and I think trying to "Trojan horse" Battle.net into popularity this way will only cause customers to resent them.
All said, Actiblizzion is a behemoth with obscene amounts of money and near unparalleled industry presence. I sincerely doubt they will change their minds if a million signed this petition, because a devoted fan-base of millions and South freaking Korea say that no matter what they do, this game will probably sell in record numbers.
Not having LAN is Blizzards way of making everyone use there new battle net. Come on Blizz you used to be cool.
But anyways even if they got 1'000'000 signatures it wont change anything.
But anyways even if they got 1'000'000 signatures it wont change anything.
If someone is hacking over a lan, the counter-measure is punching the guy in the face.redmarine said:
You know when I clicked this thread I thought "boy I sure hope nobody thinks this is exactly like the L4D2 boycott...oh damnit they did."
Would someone explain to me what universe they came from where signing a perfectly genial document wanting a feature that by all rights should be in a game (LAN play for SCII) is equal to people complaining and demanding a free game via an internet group, citing promises that they claim the developer hasn't kept but actually are keeping, and griefing the hell out of anybody who won't join their club? (L4D2 Whinefest).
Look, the simple matter is that the two are different. For example, this SCII petition actually makes sense. SC1 had LAN, SCII doesn't, and LAN was integral to the popularity of the first game. And I've already said plenty about what I think about the L4D2 boycott to point out that no, it's not the same, not by a long shot.
As to whether or not this will solve anything, well if Blizzard really does hold petitions with disdain then I wonder why everyone thinks they're so great.
EDIT: In regards to the price conversation that's come up again, Blizzard released the expansion packs for WoW at the same price of the base game. I doubt they'll be giving any huge discounts to installments 2 and 3 of SCII. If anything they'll all just be $40 each, like with WoW...if you're lucky.
Would someone explain to me what universe they came from where signing a perfectly genial document wanting a feature that by all rights should be in a game (LAN play for SCII) is equal to people complaining and demanding a free game via an internet group, citing promises that they claim the developer hasn't kept but actually are keeping, and griefing the hell out of anybody who won't join their club? (L4D2 Whinefest).
Look, the simple matter is that the two are different. For example, this SCII petition actually makes sense. SC1 had LAN, SCII doesn't, and LAN was integral to the popularity of the first game. And I've already said plenty about what I think about the L4D2 boycott to point out that no, it's not the same, not by a long shot.
As to whether or not this will solve anything, well if Blizzard really does hold petitions with disdain then I wonder why everyone thinks they're so great.
EDIT: In regards to the price conversation that's come up again, Blizzard released the expansion packs for WoW at the same price of the base game. I doubt they'll be giving any huge discounts to installments 2 and 3 of SCII. If anything they'll all just be $40 each, like with WoW...if you're lucky.
Alternatively, you could not buy the product. If it's such a big deal, then why bother supporting it? All internet petitions do is start a letter writing campaign without the letter writing. If it bugs you that much, encourage people to write letters/emails to Activision-Blizzard; that'll have a lot more effect than a bunch of random people signing an uncontrolled petition.Jumplion said:
I'm signing this, and i don't even want the game. It's one of the worst decisions i've ever heard.
I didn't hear anything about a boycott, all I've heard is people bitching about not having LAN. Haven't heard anyone say that they're going to miss out on one of 2010's biggest titles because of that little thing. The news story never mentions the word "boycott" except in passing mention of the L4D2 boycott. As far as we can tell from this story, they're just doing a faux letter campaign.Jumplion said:
If the petition had some manner of actual identification beyond Email address, I might take it more seriously. But since I myself have four email accounts, I know that that is not a viable method of identification.
Delayed due to lan support?
I could probably mod lan support into Starcraft II in less than a week by myself.
Blizzard you can pay me to do it.
I could probably mod lan support into Starcraft II in less than a week by myself.
Blizzard you can pay me to do it.
Wtf, LAN parties are an integral part of gaming, along with splitscreen gaming on consoles (wtf this is slowly getting taken away too, which is why the console game I play the most is MarioKart N64) because yeah sure internet can allow you to play people around the globe, but the most memorable gaming moments i think are sitting around with 8 or so buddies and playing the game, having some brews, and just having a good ol time, its not a necessary feature, but it does enhance gameplay i think, plus you dont have to deal with lag, and its just a great overall experience. My favorite memories are from the original SC playing LAN with my bro and other friends and we just had a great time, I definitely signed