bit-gamer.net

Lack of LAN in StarCraft 2 is "no big deal"

Lack of LAN in StarCraft 2 is "no big deal"

Blizzard has cut the option for LAN multiplayer from StarCraft 2, much to the annoyance of some fans of the game.

Blizzard may be facing a fair bit of backlash over the removal of a LAN multiplayer option in StarCraft 2, but Blizzard's VP of Game Design, Rob Pardo, reckons that it isn't actually a big deal.

Speaking to Kotaku out at GamesCom 2009, Pardo said that he thinks the number of people who will actually be affected by the removal of LAN support is fairly small.

Blizzard has opted to remove LAN support in order to sync the game completely in with the online Battle.net system used by Blizzard games. In short that means that, if you can't get online, there's no way to play StarCraft 2 multiplayer.

"Everyone is going to give us flack until it's out. None of us is going to know how big a deal it is until it's out," said Pardo. "We believe that it's really not that big of a deal - that most people are not really going to notice that it's missing."

"There's a few legitimate cases that we're going to try and address over time. Location-based tournaments, or let's say I'm in a dorm with a firewall or something like that, hopefully there's a way to determine that and maybe start a peer-to-peer game."

The comments haven't stopped the backlash though, obviously and if anything Blizzard fans are annoyed that these instances are going to be addressed over time rather than available at launch, by the looks of things. Let us know your thoughts in the forums.

43 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
C-Sniper 24th August 2009, 11:24 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
:|

I think that sums it up pretty well...
billysielu 24th August 2009, 11:25 Quote
Removing features is always risky business.
liratheal 24th August 2009, 11:31 Quote
I guess LANers are small groups, huh.

Never mind that thousands get together at times. Never mind the uni students with their own hub.

Blizzard have gone rather astray with this one. Three different games to get the full picture, delayed, removing features that're core to the RTS genre.

I hope it comes back to bite them in the ass.
kingred 24th August 2009, 11:39 Quote
the death of the games industry wasnt caused by piracy, but casuals!
wuyanxu 24th August 2009, 11:46 Quote
don't worry, pirates will have LAN games up and running before the game is released.

the legit buyers always suffers in this cat and mouse game
Tyrmot 24th August 2009, 11:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuyanxu
don't worry, pirates will have LAN games up and running before the game is released.

the legit buyers always suffers in this cat and mouse game

exactly
perplekks45 24th August 2009, 12:00 Quote
Quote:
"There's a few legitimate cases that we're going to try and address over time. Location-based tournaments, or let's say I'm in a dorm with a firewall or something like that, hopefully there's a way to determine that and maybe start a peer-to-peer game."

Yay! P2P networks are lag-free! Finally! Thank you Blizzard!

YOU EFFIN MORONS!
Skiddywinks 24th August 2009, 12:11 Quote
FFS. Me and my three housemates next year are massive fans of RTS games. I have been waiting for SC2 so long, and now there is absolultely no point in convincing them all to get it, since we would have to play over battle.net, even though we are in the same frickin' house.

I can see the amount of people rebelling against this by pirating it being very high, much like with Spore. In fact, if they just left LAN in, I think they would be affected less by piracy than they will now.
mrb_no1 24th August 2009, 12:20 Quote
idiots...me and a bunch of mates get together every year to lan it up, there's probably 5 of us who are regulars, now a game like the original always gets played, and supcom, some cs, left4dead and so on, this game has just ruled itself out by not including lan, especially as this year the house we are crashing has a restricted download limit, thus come the end of the week battle.net would just sotp working as we reach our limit, niche case, but still an effect, and that there is 5 sales of the game that wont happen. boillox

peace

fatman

agreeing on the piracy comments too fellas!
Tokukachi 24th August 2009, 12:45 Quote
How much will they be charging for access to battle.net again? Seems like every Blizzard decision these days is based on how much money they can get out of you... :(

+1 on the Piracy comments too.. you know it will happen :(
Eriku-Kun 24th August 2009, 12:50 Quote
Stuey 24th August 2009, 13:01 Quote
Okay, so because of this more people will pirate the game? BS. Those who pirate the game would have done so anyways.

The removal of LAN play is slightly annoying, but won't really affect me at all. I wonder why Blizzard did that, though.

There are many MP games that don't have LAN modes... doesn't make this right, but doesn't mean the end of the world either.
DXR_13KE 24th August 2009, 13:06 Quote
First they divide the game into bits, now they remove LAN support.... f*** you Blizzard!!!!!
wuyanxu 24th August 2009, 13:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuey
Okay, so because of this more people will pirate the game? BS. Those who pirate the game would have done so anyways.

The removal of LAN play is slightly annoying, but won't really affect me at all. I wonder why Blizzard did that, though.

There are many MP games that don't have LAN modes... doesn't make this right, but doesn't mean the end of the world either.
no one said people will pirate the game because of this. i only said i am sad that pirates will get a better deal by not paying for the game. implying that this is not the best way to combat piracy on a LAN party blockbuster game such as this one.
Xtrafresh 24th August 2009, 14:18 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuey
Okay, so because of this more people will pirate the game? BS. Those who pirate the game would have done so anyways.

The removal of LAN play is slightly annoying, but won't really affect me at all. I wonder why Blizzard did that, though.

There are many MP games that don't have LAN modes... doesn't make this right, but doesn't mean the end of the world either.
That's just blind goody-two-shoes BS, sorry to be so blunt. SC1 is (as mentioned) a LAN blockbuster, and SC2 is about the most anticipated game in the LAN community, be it small LANs like dorms aor a few mates coming together or the bigger organised ones. All those people will be urging to play it. Those among them that would normally pay for the game will certainly turn to a pirated version to be able to play it on a LAN. Also, people like me who play a pirated version for reduced hassle and then pay for the original will surely be less inclined to pay for the game, i know i would. That's just two instances of people being driven into the arms of pirates, not to mention the much bigger group that sees all the negativity and then just thinks "fk it".

The removal of LAN might not affect you, but you can't deny that it does affect a large group of others. Why should we all conform to your model of play?

Your 3rd point is that many other games are without LAN also. Those games aren't the second part of a franchise that thanks a big part of it's popularity to LAN though.
Diosjenin 24th August 2009, 14:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuey
Okay, so because of this more people will pirate the game? BS. Those who pirate the game would have done so anyways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuyanxu
no one said people will pirate the game because of this.

Then I'll say it.

In this day and age, any big-budget game that includes multiplayer but not multiplayer over LAN is broken. Period. That goes triple for a game like SC2, which would have been easily bound to become the most-played LAN game of its generation.

And yes, I would have paid for this game. Even with the splitting it up into three parts crap, I would have paid for it. Maybe I would have waited six or eight months to buy each individual part so I was only paying $20 or $30, but yes, I absolutely would have bought each one.

Problem is that I'm not any more eager to pay for a broken game than I would be to pay for a broken plate. If I bother with the game at all, it will be pirated - but then the big "if" is whether or not I bother. I'm just not sure that even pirating the game and hacking it to work over LAN will be worth the manhours it would take to set up correctly. There's a fairly large chance that I just won't consider it to be worth my time.

I hope Blizzard has the foresight to fix their game before it launches (they certainly seem to be giving themselves enough time to do so). But I'm not holding my breath.


- Diosjenin -
TTmodder 24th August 2009, 14:32 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blizzard
Lack of Lan in Starcraft 2 is "No Big Deal"

WRONG!!
Skiddywinks 24th August 2009, 15:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eriku-Kun
Hamachi ( https://secure.logmein.com/products/hamachi/vpn.asp) is your friend.

I don't see your point? I use Hamachi for a few games, but those games still require LAN functionality. Hamachi isn't going to help at all. Hamachi tricks the program/computer into thinking an internet connection is a LAN connection. If Starcraft 2 does not support LAN connections, Hamachi will get you nowhere.
rollo 24th August 2009, 15:58 Quote
battlenet is free. It will stop a few sales. Bet the only thing to beat it on sales is wow cataclysm . And when you have the market so wrapped up does it make a blind bit of diffrence.

If it doesnt sell a million copys in the first day id be shocked.
Tokukachi 24th August 2009, 16:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rollo
battlenet is free. It will stop a few sales.

I'm pretty sure Blizzard said that they were looking to add charges of some kind when SC2 launches..
hotnikkelz 24th August 2009, 17:29 Quote
I'll wait for someone to hack it, put in lan, and play it over an 'illegal' server :) .....just for spite.
Blizzard really dissapointed with this decision. Silly way to 'combat' piracy
Project_Nightmare 24th August 2009, 17:50 Quote
No lan is blasphemy. The only reason the first is still around is because of the LAN.
pendragon 24th August 2009, 17:59 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neat69
I'm pretty sure Blizzard said that they were looking to add charges of some kind when SC2 launches..

I'd be interested in a link to where you got this info, as I believe I've heard exactly the opposite on gamasutra

Gamasutra article
Elton 24th August 2009, 18:13 Quote
If they do add charges, then they have gotten just as bad as EA.

And LAN is awesome..how else do I play with friends?
thehippoz 24th August 2009, 18:28 Quote
I can't remember but did warcraft 3 have a lan option? only remember playing it on bnet
Elton 24th August 2009, 18:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by thehippoz
I can't remember but did warcraft 3 have a lan option? only remember playing it on bnet

It did.
somidiot 24th August 2009, 19:39 Quote
that really irritates me since LAN play was the only kind I was planning on doing. I was iffy on buying it when it came out, now, if they don't reintegrate LAN, I'm definately not going to get it untill all 3 parts are a bundle and much cheaper.
biebiep 24th August 2009, 19:40 Quote
Christ,

Imagine sitting next to someone and having a ping of over 200 just cuz it routes you trough blizzard.

OMAIGODNO.
perplekks45 24th August 2009, 20:45 Quote
Blizzard said they might add charges for "Premium Content", whatever that might be.

Other than that I don't understand how you can say "No LAN support isn't a big deal, I haz teh intarwebz n-e-wayz!!!111"...
What about all those people with slow or no connections at all? How do you want to do that for big LAN parties with several thousand people? How much bandwidth is it going to use? How much will it be influenced by lag issues?

Too many negative aspects to using B.Net or P2P [what a joke!] instead of LAN for me.
Star*Dagger 24th August 2009, 21:50 Quote
Well it is obvious that Blizzard has opened the 7th seal and is unleashing the end times upon us!! Just in time for 2012!!

People, grow up!!! It is Blizzards game, and they decided to remove lan, they said that they would work with people after the release. Fair enough.
You act as if you have to die or something, do not buy it if it bothers you that much.

Yours in Hardcore PC Gaming Plasma,
Star*Dagger
Stuey 24th August 2009, 23:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xtrafresh
That's just blind goody-two-shoes BS, sorry to be so blunt. SC1 is (as mentioned) a LAN blockbuster, and SC2 is about the most anticipated game in the LAN community, be it small LANs like dorms aor a few mates coming together or the bigger organised ones. All those people will be urging to play it. Those among them that would normally pay for the game will certainly turn to a pirated version to be able to play it on a LAN. Also, people like me who play a pirated version for reduced hassle and then pay for the original will surely be less inclined to pay for the game, i know i would. That's just two instances of people being driven into the arms of pirates, not to mention the much bigger group that sees all the negativity and then just thinks "fk it".

The removal of LAN might not affect you, but you can't deny that it does affect a large group of others. Why should we all conform to your model of play?

Your 3rd point is that many other games are without LAN also. Those games aren't the second part of a franchise that thanks a big part of it's popularity to LAN though.

Have you ever tried to play LAN games in a dorm? A lot of the time the networking is so screwed up that we had to sign in online anyways. Some dorms are LAN game friendly, but many are not.

Frankly, there are bigger issues than the omission of LAN capabilities. The people that are boo-hooing over the tentative LAN omission should appreciate that that's the worst thing they have to complain about.

Too many drama queens out there these days. Besides, there's a while before the game's released and blizzard will probably backpeddle and flip-flop half a dozen times before then.
Loot3r 24th August 2009, 23:57 Quote
^^^ thats the point, its a product you paying for... and supporting! should not settle for anything less than TOP NOTCH!
Aracos 25th August 2009, 00:09 Quote
I think 2 things will happen: Either they patch it back in after release or somone releases something to fool the game into thinking you're playing online when you're playing via lan, I never thought people would need to reverse the roles before :P
perplekks45 25th August 2009, 00:25 Quote
The way I understood it it's a bit like Steam where you have to be signed in to play a game but without the option of an offline mode.
Crazyglue 25th August 2009, 01:22 Quote
Ive been a pretty big blizzard fan for a while now. I've played Diablo 2 extensively, WoW religiously, and Starcraft 2 is a childhood past time that me and my buddies play every time we LAN. However, recently, I doubt I will play any blizzard game in the future. WoW has turned into a joke with version 3.2 out, and im not looking forward to 3.3 (when u can finally complete all the content in the expansion). Cataclysm looks like it will be absolutely no fun at all. I've also been put off by Diablo 3, the new class (monk) looks like they decided to put mortal combat into the game, and the graphics looks just a little bit too much like WoW. SIgh, and Starcraft 2.... anyone remember when it was supposed to be out a year ago? no wait, 6 months ago? no wait, last month? Blizzard said they would release it at the end of 2009. Fine. I can wait, I'll be getting a nice fat x-mas bonus and can spend it on a great new game. Now they say, "no no, its gonna be 2010." why not just say it will be Dec. 21, 2012? You know, they day the world will supposedly end, so that when Blizzard has finally realized how much of people's time they have wasted, you will only have to play the (seemingly not very apealling) game for only 1 day. I swear, if Blizzard decided to release ANY of their 3 new games (that are in development now) this year, they might win my heart back. Untill then, my WoW subscription will stay cancelled and I won't be buying SC2/D3.

Crazyglue
Mithyx 25th August 2009, 04:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazyglue
...and Starcraft 2 is a childhood past time that me and my buddies play every time we LAN.

Apparently Crazyglue is from the future and he's pointing out that they do end up adding LAN support... everyone can relax now :)
Tasik 25th August 2009, 18:26 Quote
Well I signed up to say only that I'm disappointed in this no lan concept.

First we have to buy 3 copies of the game and now we can't even simply play it in our cold dark damp basement with our unattractive socially inept friends.

I was actually really hoping Blizzard would bring back the idea of 'spawn' installations. Those were the days when they were loyal to there fans.

(Not that I feel Blizzard owes there fans anything. All fans do is complain about how long it takes for them to release something and then once its out b!tch about how much its lacking and how disappointed they are.)

Anyways in desperation I signed this petition. I know it won't do anything, but f*** what else am I suppose to do?

http://www.petitiononline.com/sc2byct/petition.html

And its safe to say that if a hacked lan version of starcraft II is released I'll downloaded it.

Because its hard enough getting 4 people onto Warcraft III Arranged Team through my stupid 2wire modem when you want to play on Battle.net.

Not requiring the internet is just so much simpler.
Stuey 25th August 2009, 23:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tasik
First we have to buy 3 copies of the game and now we can't even simply play it in our cold dark damp basement with our unattractive socially inept friends.
From what they've said, each game will have a lengthy enough campaign to justify the separation and prices. The multiplayer will be fully functional starting with the 1st release anyways.
perplekks45 25th August 2009, 23:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuey
From what they've said, each game will have a lengthy enough campaign to justify the separation and prices.
I heard Santa and the Easter Bunny will bring it to each and everyone personally!!!





:|
Tasik 26th August 2009, 16:36 Quote
http://www.petitiononline.com/LANSC2/petition.html

This is a much better petition. Makes me feel a little less alone.
lostintime 26th September 2009, 06:59 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neat69
How much will they be charging for access to battle.net again? Seems like every Blizzard decision these days is based on how much money they can get out of you... :(

+1 on the Piracy comments too.. you know it will happen :(

the only reason they charge for bnet access on WoW is because of the massively large amount of computing power it takes to run such worlds n keep them synced... regular battle.net (wc2/3, d2, sc1) is more like an irc network and barely takes a damn thing in comparison.

i doubt its truely a pirate issue on the no LAN, theres probably loopholes in the LAN mode in SC1 that allow all those noob ass hacks to exist and they just dont want to admit it.... though i still own those bitches even when the zerg min hack existed (which is now gone).
lostintime 26th September 2009, 07:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by biebiep
Christ,

Imagine sitting next to someone and having a ping of over 200 just cuz it routes you trough blizzard.

OMAIGODNO.

if your ping to bnet is 200 then your internet sucks ass, my internet ping is 7ms and to bnet only 32ms.... get off the copper wired DSL buddy
perplekks45 26th September 2009, 08:54 Quote
To the two above:

1. The reason why there is no LAN mode is that you'll then be forced to use B.Net, see their adverts and/or use the premium offers that cost money.

2. Not everybody can get a connection that is that fast. In Germany I had 16Mbit/s with an average ping of <20. Here in Austria I have 3Mbit/s with an average ping >55. There just isn't anything better available in this area. I will however move into Vienna soon and get myself either 50,000/5,000 or 100,000/10,000 for max 70 EUR/month. I think I'll go for the 50Mbit/s as that would include phone and TV as well for just 65 EUR/month.

Then I'll be back to online gaming while downloading which is just impossible right now.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums