Fans Petition For StarCraft II LAN, Blizzard Responds

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Fans Petition For StarCraft II LAN, Blizzard Responds

image

Over 13,000 StarCraft fans have signed a petition for LAN support in the upcoming sequel, but community rep Karune says the company is committed to its Battle.net platform.

Fans unhappy about the recently announced lack of LAN support for Blizzard's upcoming StarCraft II have taken to the most honorable and unquestionably effective form of protest: the Internet petition. In said petition, the undersigned demand - er, very politely request - that the company reconsider its decision to make the Battle.net service the default for multiplayer:

We understand you will be adding amazing new features to Battle.net that you can't talk about yet, but regardless of any features you might add online, we would still like to be able to play in a traditional network where no internet connection is needed. For an internet connection might not always be available.

The new Battle.net sounds absolutely awesome from the sneak peeks you have given us, and people will most likely be using it exclusively, even if they only play single player. However, there is no harm in allowing LAN play as well, and it does bring further depth and life to what will probably become the top RTS of the next decade.

The points they make in support of LAN have been made before, but that doesn't undermine their validity: Internet is something you have to pay for and might find yourself without, lag-free connections, and so on.

Valid though their points might be, Blizzard seems to be holding firm. Blizzard's StarCraft community manager Karune defended the choice, saying that while piracy was a concern (as many had predicted), it was a question of functionality. Battle.net 2.0 will still be a free service, said Karune, and that the decision would bring the StarCraft community together in one spot.

Beyond that, though, Karune - who claimed to have been a LAN diehard in the day - expressed confidence that the new features and functionality in the upcoming Battle.net (powerful stat trackers and ease of replay sharing, among others) would win the doubters over: "We would not take out LAN if we did not feel we could offer players something better."

It's still a hard sell, and many remain unconvinced. Those in despair over the change may still have some hope, though - when one poster on the StarCraft forums pointed out that it would be perfectly possible to enable LAN play through Battle.net verification, Karune answered, "I will be sure to forward ideas in regards to LAN as described. I too have many fond memories of LAN parties."

(BlizzBlues)

Permalink

Blizzard, I know you want as many people as possible on your precious bnet, but honestly how hard is it to put LAN functions into a game?

This is a case where you can have your cake and eat it too

countrysteaksauce:
Blizzard, I know you want as many people as possible on your precious bnet, but honestly how hard is it to put LAN functions into a game?

This is a case where you can have your cake and eat it too

They had it implemented in a last years build but decided to remove it.

If they do implement LAN we can expect a shitload of pirated games and services like Garena. I hope they choose to stay with Battle.net

LAN would just make this game that much better, I don't see why leave it out.

Guess we have to wait for the release on the details for Battle.Net. I am keeping my fingers crossed that they are actually implementing an awesome idea and not pulling some stupid EA-brained move. This may turn out to be a much better answer to piracy prevention than DRM, but we'll see. I am not getting SC2 just for the single player, though I am jazzed at how the storyline continues after Kerrigan handed everyone's butts to themselves.

EDIT: And big kudos to whoever wrote the heading for the petition. Hints at the outrage while still being mature and concise.

Karune, Don't be a douche

It comes back to piracy again...

Give it a month or two after SC2 comes out, someone somewhere will figure out how to hack the code and add in LAN support. After that its only a matter of time before said person makes it available to the public.

An internet petition! What will they do to combat it! Counter-Petition? Or just ignore it.

No way you spin it, it's a no-win situation for them.

Either they include it and face the expected piracy with the fans happy or they cut lan and lose the enthusiastic basement fans for a little more money. I think if they actually cut it they might see an even stronger rise in piracy with people downloading modded versions of the game that include off-line lan.

It boils down to this: Removing lan from the sequel of the poster-child of lan parties is always stupid.

I think it's beyond retarded. Imagine if you couldn't play Starcraft 1 in LAN. That's exactly how retarded it is.

KeyMaster45:
Give it a month or two after SC2 comes out, someone somewhere will figure out how to hack the code and add in LAN support. After that its only a matter of time before said person makes it available to the public.

Well, it *does* come down to functionality. If B.net - a free service - can provide a better gaming experience than a LAN can, why use a LAN? Of course, that's a big *if*.

Who cares if they can offer something better? Never, EVER, take an option out of a game that was in a previous game, even if you think you have something better. Maybe the new B-net stuff will be better, and I'll never want LAN. But someone will want it, and there's no good reason to leave it out. (preventing piracy is not a good reason. Making your game worse to prevent piracy only encourages it, especially since anyone who knows how to crack a game will know how to add LAN, so the pirates will get the features that paying customers are denied.)

If they were soooo sure that Bnet 2.0 is going to be soooo good that nobody will want to use anything else, then what harm would there be including LAN functionality as well? It won't effect their numbers, and will provide more options for their customers. Taking options away from customers is always, ALWAYS, a bad idea. It's pretty clear that adding LAN functions isn't all that hard, given that most multiplayer games have some form of it. I'm a bit disappointed with Blizzard's decision on this, even though I'm probably not even going to be buying the new Starcraft, much less play multiplayer.

Sigh LAN was the best way to play. We could take 8 laptops to school and play over the lunch break. The School's wireless firewalls would never allow b.net connections. But an 8 port switch was a perfect alternative.

You see? This is why the L4D2 boycott was a good thing! I've stated this before, if over 30,000 gamers can come together to petition on something relatively insignificant (face it, the boycot was doomed from the start) against a very well known company such as VALVe, who knows what people could acomplish if they worked together for a more reasonable cause!

I hope this won't boil down to more people pirating the game because it doesn't have LAN, I want petitions and boycott groups like this to continue to move and (hopefully) improve the game they're boycotting. A boycott group with 600,000 members against EAs DRM crap will do much more good than 600,000 people pirating their next game because the latter will only reinforce EA to continue their restrictive DRM stuff.

This is why the L4D2 boycott was a good thing, this is how we should demand changes to games that we are not warranted. Granted, some may be for stupid reasons (Fiddle music? WTF?) but if we could move these boycotts and protests to more productive things, then it could really turn out great.

Free translation, from Necktie to English:

We don't want people playing over Hamachi. We belief that the number of people who will now buy instead of pirate the game is worth it. We do not care about what the fans want, because they are all nerds who will buy the game whether it includes LAN or not.

Bend over,
Blizzard

CantFaketheFunk:
Well, it *does* come down to functionality. If B.net - a free service - can provide a better gaming experience than a LAN can, why use a LAN? Of course, that's a big *if*.

You're talking about some magical stuff there, especially since the point of a LAN is so you don't have to be connected to the net to use it.

So, unless they come up with some sort of magic-voodoo that allows me to connect to Bnet without being connected to the internet, sure. That seems highly unlikely though.

Of course, if they go with the Steam method of doing things then that would be acceptable. Register your CD-Key online, force me to connect to Bnet once every two weeks in order to activate LAN. That'd be just fine and dandy. Also, acceptable.

As it stands, there's no way they can do anything with BNet that is better than a LAN.

Jumplion:
*snip*

The other difference is that Blizzard actually listens to the community while VALVe goes "LolSteamwut?" and theres some few ways to get their attention:

A) You track down their STEAM ids(They all on Steam.)

B)You go to their HQ in Seattle.

I still say online petitions don't do that much good agaisnt big corporations. It only worked with Blizzard cause they talk more with the public...something that VALVe seems to completly forget sometimes.

"Public? Whats this Public?"
"The guys who buy our stuff."
"Oh right right..."

I didn't buy Hellgate:London simply because there was no LAN multiplayer.
And i don't plan on buying starcraft 2 now, even though i was a big fan of the first game (i even still play it)

Are there human beings who actually pirate a Blizzard game? No seriously, Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 will sell like cakes even among my friends who prefer to pirate games.

Everybody's up in arms aboutthis, but Blizzard knows what they're doing and isn't going to do something completely idiotic. They will, in all likelyhood, have some option to use B.net to play local games off-line. I could very well be wrong, though.

I've seen this happen with other game companies, and the public outrage is usually unwaranted.

Well there goes the 8 player LANfest I was gonna have on launch day. Don't even know if I'll bother getting it now. Might as well just play SC1 instead. The difference looks negligible anyway.

Seriously, LAN play was pretty much all I was gonna do with it anyway. Logging in to B-net is annoying as it is. Also, what if I don't particularly like being on your global scoreboard. All that's gonna do is get me depressed. Not to say I'm a bad player (I school my friends all the time) but just how much worse I probably am to the best.

This is why PC gaming is such a lonely form of gaming. Split-screen doesn't work, and the closest thing to it (LAN) is being thrown out by everyone.

Also... WHO THE F*** CARES ABOUT PIRACY!!! THE GAMES GONNA BE A F***ING RUNAWAY SUCCESS ANYWAY!!! (Plenty will disagree with that point but, really. Can anyone see this game being hurt by piracy?)

Well my points have probably all been stated more times than worth mentioning. But as Anonymous always says: STFU NOoB!

Is there even any piratable copies of Blizzard games, because I just made a search and I'm not finding many that look realistic.

(I'm just wondering if Blizzard games are piratable, I don't want to dl them)

Alright two things Bliz 1) This is Starcraft-fucking-2 it's going to make you so much money you could go to the bathroom with 20 dollar bills, 2)It's going to be pirated no matter what get over it.

Make that 21,000 by now.

And Blizzard continues releasing bullshit PR. This doesn't have anything to do with piracy, it will sell tons and it will be pirated a lot just the same. And it doesn't have anything to do with B.Net 2.0 either: they could release all those oh-so-fantastic achievements, stats, and whatever while releaseing the game with LAN support.

They just want to put two tons of ads and control how everyone plays. And they're not going to do it with my money.

It's like listening to the clothing salesman from Hell.

Hi, I'd like blue jeans.

Okay, but have you thought about maybe buying these gym shorts instead?

No...I'm pretty sure I need blue jeans.

Right, well I'm a big fan of jeans too. That makes a lot of sense. But really, check out these gym shorts.

L.B. Jeffries:
It's like listening to the clothing salesman from Hell.

Hi, I'd like blue jeans.

Okay, but have you thought about maybe buying these gym shorts instead?

No...I'm pretty sure I need blue jeans.

Right, well I'm a big fan of jeans too. That makes a lot of sense. But really, check out these gym shorts.

Best Example EVER!

In an official petition, you never use the words "absolutely awesome". Maybe avoiding "awesome" altogether may be a good idea.

Could someone please explain to me why LAN = Piracy?

I'm really confused because multiplayer is pretty much the #1 piracy deterrent.

ElArabDeMagnifico:
Could someone please explain to me why LAN = Piracy?

I'm really confused because multiplayer is pretty much the #1 piracy deterrent.

Yeah I'm not very sure, but I think it has something to do with being able to play multi-player without a connection, so pirates can still experience a huge part of the game and the servers or whatever can't detect it because the pirates didn't use a internet connection to play.

Fans unhappy about the recently announced lack of LAN support for Blizzard's upcoming StarCraft II have taken to the most honorable and unquestionably effective form of protest: the Internet petition.

Don't know why, but that made me lol.

This was purely an attempt to force people into buying copies of the game. No more sharing a copy around a house so you can all play, oh no. Now you need 4 copies!

Blizzard are clever cookies when it comes to money....

Bretty:
This was purely an attempt to force people into buying copies of the game. No more sharing a copy around a house so you can all play, oh no. Now you need 4 copies!

Blizzard are clever cookies when it comes to money....

Yeah they usually find a way.

Please just do what Steam does. They verify your games AND allow LAN play don't they? In the last 6 months a group of about 15-20 of my friends have had LAN parties with Starcraft 1, Warcraft 3, and Team Fortress 2. Everyone has legit copies of the games. I've personally bought about 10 copies of Starcraft 1 over the last 10 years (lost or scratched discs, some for friends, etc). Don't let the fear of piracy keep this out of the game.

ElArabDeMagnifico:
Could someone please explain to me why LAN = Piracy?

I'm really confused because multiplayer is pretty much the #1 piracy deterrent.

Hamachi, a very popular program, allows players to play online over a virtual network. In other words, you and I could play a LAN game of SC right now if we wanted to using Hamachi.

I use it regularly for games like Titan Quest because my friends and I can't connect to each other through the online component. In fact, many legit users use it because they can't connect to whatever service that particular game uses (their own, failspy, etc.). BNet won't be any different.

That's what they mean by piracy, but it's a very, very weak argument.

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here