No LAN play in Starcraft II?

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: Dumac

Originally posted by: darkrisen2003
ok how in the hell is this a way to fight piracy? There are ton's of emulated versions of battlenet out there that will allow you to play hacked versions of any blizzard game for free. This is a sign that blizzard is about to make battlenet a paid service to get the same return out of the games as they do with wow.

I really doubt they would do that.

If they did, I'd shit bricks.

Wouldn't surprise me.
They already broke the single/multi player campaign into original game + expansion 1 + expansion 2 .


I think breaking it into expansions like that before you even release the first game shows they are rubbing their hands together preparing for all the cash they can make.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: Dumac

Originally posted by: darkrisen2003
ok how in the hell is this a way to fight piracy? There are ton's of emulated versions of battlenet out there that will allow you to play hacked versions of any blizzard game for free. This is a sign that blizzard is about to make battlenet a paid service to get the same return out of the games as they do with wow.

I really doubt they would do that.

If they did, I'd shit bricks.

Wouldn't surprise me.
They already broke the single/multi player campaign into original game + expansion 1 + expansion 2 .


I think breaking it into expansions like that before you even release the first game shows they are rubbing their hands together preparing for all the cash they can make.

From what they claim, the first game will be the full multiplayer and won't rely on the expansions. I don't know how true that is, but whatever....

As for the SP campaigns, what's the big deal about the break up? Just one race's campaign will be at least as big as the entire original SC campaign.

 

[Dumac]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511
From what they claim, the first game will be the full multiplayer and won't rely on the expansions. I don't know how true that is, but whatever....

As for the SP campaigns, what's the big deal about the break up? Just one race's campaign will be at least as big as the entire original SC campaign.

The original SC had full multiplayer too, but you bet the expansions will add stuff that causes the population to migrate, just as with Brood Wars.

The big deal with the break up is that they are planning a trilogy from the get go. This is usually never good for a video game plot. Sure, one race's campaign may have as many missions as the original SC campaign, but will it be as intriguing, diverse, and comprehensive? The whole reason was SC campaigns were great was because you switched from faction to faction and experienced their part in the story. Now we have to wait a long time before getting a fresh perspective.

Also I'm just kind of pissed because I hate terrans, which dampers my excitement for SC2 since I know the whole campaign will be one big terranfest. I would always rush through their campaign in SC1 and BW.

Finally, if the trend of SC and BW are any clue, I bet protoss win

 

[Dumac]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: Dumac

Originally posted by: darkrisen2003
ok how in the hell is this a way to fight piracy? There are ton's of emulated versions of battlenet out there that will allow you to play hacked versions of any blizzard game for free. This is a sign that blizzard is about to make battlenet a paid service to get the same return out of the games as they do with wow.

I really doubt they would do that.

If they did, I'd shit bricks.

Wouldn't surprise me.
They already broke the single/multi player campaign into original game + expansion 1 + expansion 2 .


I think breaking it into expansions like that before you even release the first game shows they are rubbing their hands together preparing for all the cash they can make.

Yes, they know giant cash loads are incoming, but do you think they would outrage the community by charing for battlenet? Sure some users would defend it, as they would probably eat anything blizzard shat on their plate, but the general PC gaming population would be pretty peeved. PC gamers hate paying for shit they think should be free, and online play is one of them. Blizzard would never hear the end of it.

Charing for battlenet would cause an increase in piracy, I bet.

Now, what I do expect, is for them to figure out dumb ways to nickel and dime you on battlenet. Like charging for a name change in D3 o

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

From what they claim, the first game will be the full multiplayer and won't rely on the expansions. I don't know how true that is, but whatever....

As for the SP campaigns, what's the big deal about the break up? Just one race's campaign will be at least as big as the entire original SC campaign.

It impacts the mulitplayer as well.
From blizzards own faq page.
http://www.starcraft2.com/faq.xml

Will we still be able to play multiplayer matches of StarCraft II with all three races?

Yes! From the beginning, StarCraft II will be a fully featured multiplayer game, and all three races will be available for competitive play.

How will the expansion sets impact multiplayer gameplay?

The expansion sets will add new content to each race for use in multiplayer matches. This could include additions such as new units, abilities, and structures, along with new maps and Battle.net updates.


If I buy StarCraft II but don't buy any of the expansion sets, will I still be able to play online?

Yes. This will work similarly to Warcraft III and the original StarCraft, which maintained separate online gaming lobbies and ladders for expansion set players and players with the base Warcraft III or StarCraft.

So you might as well plan on buying all three. Everyone knows that is what will be needed to keep playing multiplayer, since people that don't have the expansion will be the minority.

I just hope they don't go "We were supposed to include xxx feature but didn't have time and decided it was best for the expansion" type answers for the main release.

If they sell the retail for $50 and each expansion for at least $30 that is $110 per player, so start saving those pennies

 

[Bateluer]

After much deliberation, I have decided that by not including LAN play ability, a core feature in any RTS, SC2 can be classified as broken. Broken games are moved on to my Do Not Buy list where they stay until fixed or I score them for ultra cheap in the bargain bin. I cannot in good conscience purchase money for a game that lacks such a crucial feature. That is all.

 

[vhx]

I am sure someone will hack some LAN support through a 3rd party application. At that point the legit purchasers get the shaft on a feature that will get hacked in anyways.

I fear this is a precursor to a Battle.net monthly fee. Why not let you play offline? Because they get no money in that case. They know they could get away with a monthly fee due to the huge success of WoW and things like Xbox Live. Even something as small as $4.99/mo. wouldn't deter a lot of people I would imagine.

And also with the trilogy of Starcraft I feel this is more of a marketing thing to milk as much out of the customers as they can. I fear Activision-Blizzard will become the new EA in the not to distant future.

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: Dumac

Originally posted by: Brainonska511
From what they claim, the first game will be the full multiplayer and won't rely on the expansions. I don't know how true that is, but whatever....

As for the SP campaigns, what's the big deal about the break up? Just one race's campaign will be at least as big as the entire original SC campaign.

The original SC had full multiplayer too, but you bet the expansions will add stuff that causes the population to migrate, just as with Brood Wars.

The big deal with the break up is that they are planning a trilogy from the get go. This is usually never good for a video game plot. Sure, one race's campaign may have as many missions as the original SC campaign, but will it be as intriguing, diverse, and comprehensive? The whole reason was SC campaigns were great was because you switched from faction to faction and experienced their part in the story. Now we have to wait a long time before getting a fresh perspective.

Also I'm just kind of pissed because I hate terrans, which dampers my excitement for SC2 since I know the whole campaign will be one big terranfest. I would always rush through their campaign in SC1 and BW.

Finally, if the trend of SC and BW are any clue, I bet protoss win

What trend is that?
Protoss ended the campaign of the first game, but Zerg still mostly won.
And zerg definitely won the second.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: vhx
I am sure someone will hack some LAN support through a 3rd party application. At that point the legit purchasers get the shaft on a feature that will get hacked in anyways.

I fear this is a precursor to a Battle.net monthly fee. Why not let you play offline? Because they get no money in that case. They know they could get away with a monthly fee due to the huge success of WoW and things like Xbox Live. Even something as small as $4.99/mo. wouldn't deter a lot of people I would imagine.

And also with the trilogy of Starcraft I feel this is more of a marketing thing to milk as much out of the customers as they can. I fear Activision-Blizzard will become the new EA in the not to distant future.

WoW and a monthly fee work because the content in WoW is ever changing and you can literally play with thousands of people at the same time in one giant game.

A RTS, where you have plenty of user-made maps, a fixed number of people per game, and a fairly fixed set of units will not fit within this model. Who would bother paying just to access multiplayer when multiplayer has been free for a long time?

If anything, it would only be to increase advertising revenue from Battle.net.

This removal of LAN support looks more like trying to stop services that bypass Battle.net by utilizing the LAN feature and essentially allowing pirated copies to be used. Especially important in emerging markets where piracy is rampant. If you can get even a few more of those people to buy the game....

 

[Dumac]

Originally posted by: Fox5

Originally posted by: Dumac

Originally posted by: Brainonska511
From what they claim, the first game will be the full multiplayer and won't rely on the expansions. I don't know how true that is, but whatever....

As for the SP campaigns, what's the big deal about the break up? Just one race's campaign will be at least as big as the entire original SC campaign.

The original SC had full multiplayer too, but you bet the expansions will add stuff that causes the population to migrate, just as with Brood Wars.

The big deal with the break up is that they are planning a trilogy from the get go. This is usually never good for a video game plot. Sure, one race's campaign may have as many missions as the original SC campaign, but will it be as intriguing, diverse, and comprehensive? The whole reason was SC campaigns were great was because you switched from faction to faction and experienced their part in the story. Now we have to wait a long time before getting a fresh perspective.

Also I'm just kind of pissed because I hate terrans, which dampers my excitement for SC2 since I know the whole campaign will be one big terranfest. I would always rush through their campaign in SC1 and BW.

Finally, if the trend of SC and BW are any clue, I bet protoss win

What trend is that?
Protoss ended the campaign of the first game, but Zerg still mostly won.
And zerg definitely won the second.

I would disagree.

At the end of SC1, the protoss succeed in destroying the Overmind, which they consider a great victory. It was SUPPOSED to turn the tide of battle.

The campaign at the end of SC1 ended with a high note strategically, although it was bitter sweet due to the death of Tassadar.

The end of Brood Wars leaves off with a high note for the Zerg.

I'm assuming it will be the same for SC2.

 

[skace]

Oh god, page 2 is where people start bitching about getting 3 games instead of 1. What the fuck do you smoke.

 

[Piuc2020]

Blizzard 1991-2009.

Rest in peace.

 

[Sylvanas]

Lets clean this up once and for all.

With only 1 of the three expansions you will have full access to all units from each faction

this means:

You don't need all 3 to play multiplayer lets put this fud to rest.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: Sylvanas
Lets clean this up once and for all.

With only 1 of the three expansions you will have full access to all units from each faction

You don't need all 3 to play multiplayer lets put this fud to rest.

That doesn't seem to be what the official FAQ states.

Anyways, I'll be buying all three boxes and trust Blizzard to make them worth the money, aside from completely screwing WoW up with WotLK, they haven't let me down so far.
That said, this no-LAN thing is annoying, I've spent so many hours playing StarCraft multiplayer, but I've never once used Battle.net, likewise with Diablo 2. I did play some Diablo 1 on b.net, but as with just about the entire online gaming "community", b.net is a cesspool consisting of about 95% complete asstards, and I don't really want anything to do with them.

The only online multiplayer communities I've really enjoyed feeling like a part of were the original WarCraft II Kali community, and the Quake 1 community.
I attribute this to online gaming being more of a niche back then, the people who played were generally far more mature, and all around far more socially adept, these days it's mostly kids or adults acting like kids. Reminds me of when I played WoW, on our realm forums some people would keep talking about the "Frostmane community", I never understood what the hell they were talking about, people overall were about as pleasant to deal with as a pack of rabid chihuahua's.

Ah well, it'll probably take all of 5 minutes for someone to release an updated b.net server software for use on local networks. And yes, I make frequent use of the LAN option on just about all the multiplayer games I still play. Drinking some beer and playing games is an awesome way to have some weekend fun

 

[Sylvanas]

That doesn't seem to be what the official FAQ states.

Plenty more on Google

When we ship StarCraft II, the multiplayer will be included. You?re getting all three races there. It?s not like you?re only getting the Terran race, and you?re taking Terran vs. Terran until you put all three together like Voltron or something.

Effectively, the multiplayer will work just as it did before. You?ll get all three races, a bunch of maps, the full Battle.net experience.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: Sylvanas

That doesn't seem to be what the official FAQ states.

Plenty more on Google

When we ship StarCraft II, the multiplayer will be included. You?re getting all three races there. It?s not like you?re only getting the Terran race, and you?re taking Terran vs. Terran until you put all three together like Voltron or something.

Effectively, the multiplayer will work just as it did before. You?ll get all three races, a bunch of maps, the full Battle.net experience.

I'll trust this more than Google in this case:
http://www.starcraft2.com/faq.xml
As Modelworks quoted:

Will we still be able to play multiplayer matches of StarCraft II with all three races?

Yes! From the beginning, StarCraft II will be a fully featured multiplayer game, and all three races will be available for competitive play.

How will the expansion sets impact multiplayer gameplay?

The expansion sets will add new content to each race for use in multiplayer matches. This could include additions such as new units, abilities, and structures, along with new maps and Battle.net updates.


If I buy StarCraft II but don't buy any of the expansion sets, will I still be able to play online?

Yes. This will work similarly to Warcraft III and the original StarCraft, which maintained separate online gaming lobbies and ladders for expansion set players and players with the base Warcraft III or StarCraft.

 

[Sylvanas]

Yeah this is because the after the first release the other two will act as expansions and Blizz have said theres no timeline set yet on when they will appear after the first one, 'When they're ready'. So, yes you will be able to play all 3 races in multiplayer with one game - the others have separate lobbys just like Frozen throne / Brood War as they are essentially expansions.

 

[Dumac]

Originally posted by: Sylvanas
Yeah this is because the after the first release the other two will act as expansions and Blizz have said theres no timeline set yet on when they will appear after the first one, 'When they're ready'. So, yes you will be able to play all 3 races in multiplayer with one game - the others have separate lobbys just like Frozen throne / Brood War as they are essentially expansions.

No one disagreed that you would be able to play all the races. The point is that people seem to think the first released game will be enough to play multiplayer, and it will be, but only if you like playing with a small population of people. The new expansions will add new units and such with new lobbies. The online population will migrate to the new expansions, leaving those who don't buy them in the dust.

Basically, if you want to play multiplayer, you should plan on buying all three

 

[Malladine]

Originally posted by: Sunner
Drinking some beer and playing games is an awesome way to have some weekend fun

QFT! I knew I liked you :beer:

 

[Piuc2020]

Originally posted by: Dumac

Originally posted by: Sylvanas
Yeah this is because the after the first release the other two will act as expansions and Blizz have said theres no timeline set yet on when they will appear after the first one, 'When they're ready'. So, yes you will be able to play all 3 races in multiplayer with one game - the others have separate lobbys just like Frozen throne / Brood War as they are essentially expansions.

No one disagreed that you would be able to play all the races. The point is that people seem to think the first released game will be enough to play multiplayer, and it will be, but only if you like playing with a small population of people. The new expansions will add new units and such with new lobbies. The online population will migrate to the new expansions, leaving those who don't buy them in the dust.

Basically, if you want to play multiplayer, you should plan on buying all three

This is the thing, Blizzard will add new multiplayer content on the expansions and if you care the least bit about multiplayer then you'll have to buy it because everyone will migrate over and the gameplay will of course be much better and balanced. So yeah, Blizzard knows we'll have to buy the full trilogy, let's just hope the Zerg and Protoss add-ons are priced like expansions (30 or so) and not the full $49.99

Before Starcraft and Warcraft only had one expansion (priced as $30), now Starcraft II will have two expansions (that you'll need to buy, Starcraft and Warcraft without Brood War and Frozen Throne, respectively, are useless) that could possibly be priced at 50 bucks.

That is the problem.

Starcraft 2 looks fine, gameplay-wise, despite the ackward decisions they have made with the game but Blizzard is no longer the legendary developers they once were, it started with WoW's release but the Activision merger seemed to be the definite blow.

Let's hope they don't mess up Diablo 3, I still have ridiculously high expectations for that game.

 

[dguy6789]

Blizzard is just turning their backs on the fans. They no longer even minutely care about making the people who made them successful happy. It's about money only now.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
Blizzard is just turning their backs on the fans. They no longer even minutely care about making the people who made them successful happy. It's about money only now.

It's always been about making money.

 

[Anubis]

everyone in this thread is making a big deal about a fucking non issue

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: Anubis
everyone in this thread is making a big deal about a fucking non issue

Funny... if it's such a NON-ISSUE like you said, then why would people be making any sort of deal out of it?

Starcraft + LAN is like Peanut Butter + Jelly.

 

[VashHT]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: dguy6789
Blizzard is just turning their backs on the fans. They no longer even minutely care about making the people who made them successful happy. It's about money only now.

It's always been about making money.

I doubt that, they were a pretty small group to start out so I'm pretty sure they got into the business because they wanted to create games that they had a vision for. This is pretty lame considering they would let you spawn multiplayer copies for free in the first starcraft.

EDIT: I just wanted to add pissing off your customers is not a good way to make money either. It may seem like a great idea in the short term to screw pirates over but when you're removing features that paying customers want it just pisses them off.