By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - Official Star Craft 2 Beta Thread

TruckOSaurus on 22 June 2010

My only concern with not having LAN play is that in the original Starcraft if you tried to play someone on the same shared Internet connection over Battle.net, it would always result in terrible lag that made the game unplayable.

If they were able to fix that issue then I have no problem with removing LAN play but if this issue is still there then you won't be able to play someone in your own home which is pretty fucking stupid.



Signature goes here!

Around the Network
Jereel Hunter on 22 June 2010
TruckOSaurus said:

My only concern with not having LAN play is that in the original Starcraft if you tried to play someone on the same shared Internet connection over Battle.net, it would always result in terrible lag that made the game unplayable.

If they were able to fix that issue then I have no problem with removing LAN play but if this issue is still there then you won't be able to play someone in your own home which is pretty fucking stupid.


I would be shocked if that were still an issue - wasn't even an issue in WC3.



TruckOSaurus on 22 June 2010
Jereel Hunter said:
TruckOSaurus said:

My only concern with not having LAN play is that in the original Starcraft if you tried to play someone on the same shared Internet connection over Battle.net, it would always result in terrible lag that made the game unplayable.

If they were able to fix that issue then I have no problem with removing LAN play but if this issue is still there then you won't be able to play someone in your own home which is pretty fucking stupid.


I would be shocked if that were still an issue - wasn't even an issue in WC3.

Then count me in the "What's the big deal with removing LAN?" clan.



Signature goes here!

vlad321 on 22 June 2010
Jereel Hunter said:
vlad321 said:
Jereel Hunter said:
vlad321 said:
c0rd said:

I'm sure this is old news to the people that were complaining about this, but just in case, I'll put up what a blue (Blizzard poster) said earlier regarding some concerns:

- Lack of Chat Channels 
... and we just announced that Chat Channels are going to be in the game a few months after release. 

- No Cross-region play 
... and we just announced that cross-region play is definitely in our plans. 

- No Unique ID 
... And we just announced that every combination of nickname 3 digit code will be unique and you will be able to add friends by using this combination. 

- You need to give out your email address 
... Which is not the case anymore, as adding Nickname.007 will be enough.

So they are fixing most of the things that make Bnet 2.0 such a horrible system, even worse than GFWL. Now about that LAN... I wonder if Blizzard will give in before the hackers get it implemented.

Well, since people not buying legal copies constitute the grand majority of people who use the LAN functionality, Blizzard is probably going to leave it to them.


Because they obviously have had problems with piracy in any of their other games right? Didn't SC1 sell near 11 million? Man Piracy really stopped it from selling and obviously none of them used LAN. Your post is so full of fail it's kind of funny, in a sad sort of way.

You're so good at refuting things that were never said. I never stated that piracy stopped their games from selling. However, since you bring it up, they sold 11m copies, but I'd be shocked if less than 25m people played the game. Looking at WC3, the sheer number of illegal copies being used on alternate servers like G-Arena is staggering. I remember I used to log on to play Dota, and anytime blizzard released a patch, if you DLed it, you'd not find a game for weeks, because all of the pirated copies would be using the older version. And just this one service accounted for thousands of users playing dota at any given time. When the server had issues, I was shocked to find that half my friends couldn't log onto b.net to play due to having illegal copies. It was (is) very widespread. Now, blizzard sells enough that they do just fine DESPITE it, but that doesn't mean they want to encourage it. And especially now that virtually all players can have as good an experience via b.net as they could over a LAN, blizzard is unlikely to add it later.

Speaking of posts being so full of fail (something you are clearly well versed in), my statement was actually fact. Blizzard has no intention of implementing LAN because, as they have stated, they consider it unnessecary. Most of those who would need to take advantage of it would do so to circumvent b.net authentication. I always enjoy when you, instead of arguing with the point someone made, make up a point of your own to attack instead.


I'd love some numbers to back up your 25m number there. Seeing Garena is not even an eighth of the people on the legit Bnet in WC3. All in all you are just guessing and have absolutely zero data to back it up. Meanwhileboth the US and Dutch governments have come to their senses to show that anyone who says that piracy causes loses of sales are liars and idiots.

You keep on failing. The you explicitly stated that only pirates use LAN, hence LAN is not implemented. Which is completely ignorant and clueless statement, one full of fail. LAN is he easiest way to connect two cimputers and play, all you need is a switch and you are done. Furthermore, for tournaments there is no other way to have lag that is in the acceptable levels. I can tell you for a fact that Bnet 2.0 did NOT have under 100 ping. I have the second best badnwidth in the US, second to the Pentagon, and I would still get 300 ping during the heavier imes of day. So no, LAN is absolutely needed for many many reasons, and say otherwise is a lie, ignorance, or idiocy. Choose one or more that apply to you.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

Jereel Hunter on 23 June 2010
vlad321 said:


I'd love some numbers to back up your 25m number there. Seeing Garena is not even an eighth of the people on the legit Bnet in WC3. All in all you are just guessing and have absolutely zero data to back it up. Meanwhileboth the US and Dutch governments have come to their senses to show that anyone who says that piracy causes loses of sales are liars and idiots.

You keep on failing. The you explicitly stated that only pirates use LAN, hence LAN is not implemented. Which is completely ignorant and clueless statement, one full of fail. LAN is he easiest way to connect two cimputers and play, all you need is a switch and you are done. Furthermore, for tournaments there is no other way to have lag that is in the acceptable levels. I can tell you for a fact that Bnet 2.0 did NOT have under 100 ping. I have the second best badnwidth in the US, second to the Pentagon, and I would still get 300 ping during the heavier imes of day. So no, LAN is absolutely needed for many many reasons, and say otherwise is a lie, ignorance, or idiocy. Choose one or more that apply to you.

25m was a guess, but I'd be surprised if it wasn't the case. As I said, Garena is one of MANY such services, and the players on the service(playing just DOTA) have exceeded six figures.

And again, I stated that pirated PRIMARILY use LAN. Not only. Yes, a small number of people would benefit from it aside from them, but virtually every pirate would.

Speaking of ignorance, though - in running a tournament, all game traffic doesn't need to be routed through battle.net. Even in the original StarCraft, way back in 1997, once players were connected to a game, they transmitted to each other. Do you remember the original StarCraft? There would be lag, server splits, etc, but once you were connected to your friends in a game, it was fine. If a bunch of people at the same location create a tournament game, it is IRRELEVANT if the battle.net ping is 300, as their computers can connect to each other for the game. Battle.net in this case exists merely for authentication. Blizzard knows their game is a massive tournament draw, and they're not going to do anything to destroy the Korean market.



Around the Network
FaRmLaNd on 24 June 2010

Everyone I know bought Starcraft, and are going to buy the sequel, yet many of them pirate.

However thats anecdotal and not relevant.

I honestly couldn't care less about lan, since I don't use it anymore, but it sucks for the people that do use it, so hopefully Blizzard will pull their finger out and implement it eventually.



vlad321 on 08 July 2010

Patch 16 is out:

 

 

General

 

  • Rally points now behave as a move command, instead of an attack move command.
  • Enabled the ability to manually add a StarCraft II character friend using the player's character code. Character code is a server-assigned numerical code that is displayed within the Add Friend panel.
  • Battle.net Achievements & Rewards have been updated.
  • All Quick Match modes are now available: 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, 4v4, and Free For All.
  • All A.I. difficulties are now available for play.
  • Cooperative matchmaking versus A.I. players is now available as a play mode.
  • Enabled cross-game social features between World of Warcraft and StarCraft II.

Balance Changes

 

  • ZERG
    • Infestor
      • Frenzy spell removed.
      • Infested Terran spell added.
    • Overseer
      • Infested Terran spell removed.
    • Ultralisk
      • Now immune to stuns and mind control.

 

 



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

TruckOSaurus on 08 July 2010

4v4!! We should build a VGChartz team and kick ass all over Battle.net



Signature goes here!

c0rd on 08 July 2010

Bah. I don't actually have a beta key, so I can  only play when my friend / bro aren't on.

This game just needs to come out already.



sethnintendo on 08 July 2010

Played it a few times on beta.  Didn't really see anything that warrants purchase.  Loved the first SC but I think I'll pass on this one.  Mainly upset with the 3 version just to play all races offline (I don't care if each race has 30 missions you could still fit that all on disc).  I can understand the main game and expansion.  Anyways, I have lost faith in Blizzard and I used to be their biggest fan (bought Diablo 1, 2, WC2, WoW, SC)....