Update: StarCraft II Will Not Support LAN

Boxpopper

New member
Feb 5, 2009
376
0
0
Oh yeah I just recalled why Battle.Net sucked with the original game... because CANNOT JOIN PING IS TOO HIGH I had CANNOT JOIN PING IS TOO HIGH some strange CANNOT JOING PING IS TOO HIGH connection CANNOT JOIN PING IS TOO HIGH problems.
 

Playbahnosh

New member
Dec 12, 2007
606
0
0
BoogieManFL said:
If it can ONLY connect through Battle.net and no TCP/IP direct connecting stuff at all, it's an anti piracy measure no matter what they say is the reason. Probably a good idea.
Dude, grow up! You can't stop piracy. The first thing that will come out beside the pirated version of SC2 is a B.net emulator for us wanting play on LAN. Look at what happened to Hellgate: London. They removed LAN support, their game failed miserably and Flagship went backrupt.

The only reason Blizzard dared to make this movie it the fact that they are financially secure, thanks to WoW, and even if SC2 fails across the board, they will be secure. Bunch of evil bastards...
 

BoogieManFL

New member
Apr 14, 2008
1,284
0
0
Grow up? What are you talking about? I simply made a comment.

I know you cannot stop piracy. If it's made by a person, it can be broken by a person. You assume too much.
 

Carnagath

New member
Apr 18, 2009
1,814
0
0
They just don't want people to have the option to pirate the game, bypass all the Battlenet customer milking features that they might have planned and just use Hamachi to play it. They think every SC2 player is gonna link a credit card number to their Battlenet account to be charged small amounts of money whenever they want to create a tournament for their friends or whatever other bullshit they will come up with? Yeah uhm, good luck with that, I know I won't be doing it at least. It will also be funny to see localized serious e-sport tournaments being played via Battlenet with 150-200ms, this ought to effectively instagib all of SC2's e-sport potential. As someone else posted before me, way to shoot themselves in the foot.
 

MontyGommo

New member
Oct 21, 2008
135
0
0
AceDiamond said:
And anybody in the US is boned LAN-party wise because our broadband is still pretty crappy compared to other parts of the world.
Ah... what?

I'm gonna guess you've never been to Australia...
 

Nomad

Dire Penguin
Aug 3, 2008
616
0
0
Huh. Darn. I was actually going to buy it for the specific purpose of LAN play... I'm not much of an internet gamer, but I've played countless hours of Starcraft on LAN with my brothers and friends. Without that feature, it'd feel a bit pointless for me to buy the sequel.
 

Sevre

Old Hands
Apr 6, 2009
4,886
0
0
If I don't get to do a sweaty zerg rush with my friends and a few wires I'm going to be outraged.
 

Xbowhyena

New member
Jan 26, 2009
335
0
0
Why are people complaining so much? It's this or DRM people! I see 2 practical uses for LAN play..

1. Spawn installs with friends, even though in my opinion that's cheating Blizzard out of honest money

2. Online if you don't have internet/have bad internet

Good things coming out of this

1. NO DRM

Good enough for me, having fine internet. It's not that bad, I've heard people complain Blizzard is just forcing us to use Battle Net, but considering that it is an excellent online service, it's like forcing you to eat a cookie to play online. You can still play with all of your friends, you just have to not be lazy and pick up a copy of the disk. What is the real problem here?
 

PodX140

New member
Jul 1, 2009
27
0
0
The real problem is is that

A) this is DRM, i can guarantee that it will validate your copy discreetly when you join battle net.
B) this removes the ability to play against other people in areas without internet, such as in rural areas.
C) Increases lag amount.
D) Ads Ads Ads.
 

Radu889

New member
Dec 14, 2007
216
0
0
SafeGuard against piracy? Really?
Like people aren't going to download them anyway.

Now all my planned LAN parties at work are bloody ruined due to the simple fact that Blizzard have proven to be lazy once again.
 

Eggyman

New member
Jul 2, 2009
30
0
0
Radu889 said:
Now all my planned LAN parties at work are bloody ruined due to the simple fact that Blizzard have proven to be lazy once again.
Same here, I was really looking forward to crushing my friends bases again, only in new kind of way, I know we can fight over the internet, but its just not the same, ah well the life must go on...
 

Nouw

New member
Mar 18, 2009
15,615
0
0
No LAN? In another RTS game I could only play LAN. Hmmm and I thought SC2 was supposed to be awesome. Oh well, I hope there are more options than Battle.Net.

SC2 Menu-Multiplayer-Battle.Net Duhn Duhn Duhn
This seems like Microsoft with slowly forcing people into buying Vista.
Blizzard, I hate you enough but why this?
 

romitelli

New member
Jan 2, 2008
108
0
0
Ah, such a greedy move; I mean, come on, one could think that Blizzard, after Warcraft, Diablo, Starcraft and Wow had the cash to, at least, pull of a lousy Lan connection.
 

Eggyman

New member
Jul 2, 2009
30
0
0
Well they have proven that MONEY from WoW has made them very very lazy, damn, maybe moders will do something, i doubt it but maybe
 

Spleenbag

New member
Dec 16, 2007
605
0
0
What the hell? LAN with your buddies has always been my biggest draw towards RTS games and the Warcraft and Starcraft games lent themselves to this so well... I don't see why they couldn't just include the functionality.
 

The_Prophet

New member
Sep 3, 2008
1,494
0
0
I think this is an attempt to defend against piracy.... greedy dicks have enough money to buy a country.
 

Derpus von Herpus

New member
Nov 14, 2008
310
0
0
I give it a month before someone releases a LAN crack for it. Barring that, I will not purchase StarCraft II. Why, DasMark, you may cry, you dangerously sexy Canadian mastodon, would you ever say that?

Because, gentle friends and neighbours, I would rather play with seven pals who I am very good friends with and have fun than lose in ten seconds to some dude who does this for a living.