Comments on: No LAN Play in Starcraft II Results in Petition

By: Mr.Funsocks

Mr.Funsocks — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 13:50:17 +0000

Blizzard, please, stop making Sc2 so “innovative”.

There’s being daring, and then there’s being stupid.

By: Drunken Blaster

Drunken Blaster — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 02:21:48 +0000

Being online is not required to play Valve games, you can into offline mode and play on a LAN. My friend lives out of town and can not get broadband, satellite or even dial-up and we played Team Fortress 2 at his LAN but SCII will not be an option. So my options are to buy the game and not be able to play on a LAN or download a hacked version that will play over a LAN. Tough choice there.

By: Unnamed Assailant

Unnamed Assailant — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 04:47:51 +0000

Great. This comes right after a bunch of ISPs start testing pay-by-byte plans? So I’ll be charged just to play with my wife in the same room? No thanks.

By: Spunky Muldonn

Spunky Muldonn — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 08:26:34 +0000

Can’t say I’m surprised. Blizz have long since given up caring about their actual fans. “Hey, you’ll have to buy three copies of Starcraft II to get the whole story, but you’ll be able to play multiplayer with just one, don’t worry.” Yes, and I’m absolutely sure each release will have exclusive multiplayer content to leverage so anyone who wants to play online a lot will HAVE to buy all 3.

Then we get this. They remove LAN to force you to use Battle Net so they get more exposure for their advertisers.

Piracy is, once again, used as the scapegoat. There’ll be Securom on the disk, no LAN to help “protect” the game, and god knows what else, all in the name of “protection”.

What a crock. I was already not buying the game due to the three seperate release scam. This is just another nail in the coffin.

I’m finding it increasingly easy to NOT buy PC games. Crippling DRM, overpriced formulaic crap etc… I swear the industry is TRYING to kill the platform so they can all bugger off to the consoles.

By: Level50Gamer.com » No LAN in StarCraft II?

Level50Gamer.com » No LAN in StarCraft II? — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 03:59:36 +0000

[...] located this post while looking through Gaming Today’s blog, and I have to say I am exceptionally [...]

By: Andy Syrewicze

Andy Syrewicze — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:52:33 +0000

As countless others have mentioned, I spent several weeks of my life, I would guess, cooped up in a friends basement playing Starcraft. LAN battles were always the best as you still had that face to face interaction you get from local console gaming. It’s just plain wrong and I’ll gladly sign any petition demanding it’s inclusion. Thanks for the link Ron!

By: tehZen

tehZen — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 17:40:47 +0000

This is really stupid, all games need LAN support these days. Why blizzard would force ppl to use internet bandwidth to play with someone in the same room is beyond me. Then again these are the greedy bastards that made WoW a subscription. NO. BAD. EVIL.

What about pro tourney’s? The whole point of going to a big LAN tournament is that almost nobody has a huge LAN in their neighborhood lol. I want to play with 0 ping damn it!

This shit better not spread to FPS.

By: Mohan

Mohan — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:19:18 +0000

Pretty lame of Blizzard to be doing this, one of the best things about SartCraft was LAN parties!

By: Morning Toast

Morning Toast — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:05:20 +0000

LAN is the only way I played (and still play) Starcraft. I only played with my friends and they were always on-hand to play, which meant LAN at my house. I’m good enough to play faceless on Battle.net so it was always LAN.

Although, I guess considering all the bandwidth these days maybe it won’t matter. Going through Battle.net to fight someone in your own house will be just as easy as LANing it, but that still sounds dreadfully inefficient.

Of course, my PC gaming days have all but left me. I don’t think my box can support any current games and I’m done playing the upgrade-your-card-n-chip dance.

By: ant

ant — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:19:52 +0000

The fewer requirements there are on a specific network configuration, the more these games will be played. Part of the success of the original starcraft is that it plays anywhere on anything, all you need is a bunch of networked computers. It doesn’t matter if the network has every port known to man firewalled off to the outside world.

By: Vix

Vix — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:01:48 +0000

I think it sucks. We actually just want to play it against each other in the same area – the good times to be had! Nothing like a good few hours of multiplayer with a few good friends.

WoW has it’s place, and with Diablo 3 I don’t care about anything other than the single player experience anyway so they can keep out the LAN from it if they want…brighter colours and all. Denying the feature from Starcraft II is just not quite as easy to go down. I don’t want to know anyone on battle.net…I don’t want to compete online except maybe for fun – but I do want to play against people I know personally…and not online. Is it that hard to include both features? No – because they’ve done it before.

By: Shawn Sines

Shawn Sines — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:01:04 +0000

So I ask this.. is this any different than online being required to handle Valve gameplay? I imagine this is more about the fact that Battle.net will be used for matchmaking in all situations… and players can make LAN games but will have to authenticate against the core servers.