surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
I would like to see LAN implemented. I won't lie I use to be against the idea myself because I viewed it at dinosaur tech that was no longer required in this era of gaming. I however believe myself to be wrong now and that games (especially games like SC2) need LAN support.
I'm a Starcraft player and it has been ridiculous how Blizzard is handling its recent products (ala SC2 and D3). SC2 has taken out features that have been there in their past games, chat rooms, shared replay viewing, clan support etc. and has been doing a terrible job balancing the game even though many pro-gamers and members of the community have volunteered information to help them with it.
For example, Marines, the tier 1 unit of Terran which costs 50 minerals (the smallest denomination available for units, not counting Zerglings which is 50 for a pair), is the best unit IN THE GAME, bar none. Easily demolising tier 3 units like the Protoss Carriers cost for cost. Recent games in the GSL with past Zerg champions IMNestea and MVPDongRaeGu have them being way outplayed simply because of Marines and the micromanagement of them. The professional Zerg players have voiced out for almost a year, with regards to units like Hydralisk being totally useless in practically every situation and Tier 3 Zerg being rolled over by any decent Terran composition and the inability to deal with simulatenous Terran infantry drops in the late game which abuses terrain advantage, but Blizzard has done nothing about it. As of now, only 2 Zerg players remain in the top 16 of the GSL, 2 out of 16 is no where near the 'balanced' ratio of 3 races if you ask me. (I'm a Masters league player if you think I need to L2P).
Other less known cases have happened recently in tournaments whereby a whole tournament was shut down because Blizzard detected a lot of simultaneous connections from an IP address when said tournament organisers applied for it to be whitelisted way before the tournament started. That is just freaking bad business practise. Punishing your fans for competing in your supposedly eSports friendly game by shutting down their tournament? Stay classy Blizzard.
For example, Marines, the tier 1 unit of Terran which costs 50 minerals (the smallest denomination available for units, not counting Zerglings which is 50 for a pair), is the best unit IN THE GAME, bar none. Easily demolising tier 3 units like the Protoss Carriers cost for cost. Recent games in the GSL with past Zerg champions IMNestea and MVPDongRaeGu have them being way outplayed simply because of Marines and the micromanagement of them. The professional Zerg players have voiced out for almost a year, with regards to units like Hydralisk being totally useless in practically every situation and Tier 3 Zerg being rolled over by any decent Terran composition and the inability to deal with simulatenous Terran infantry drops in the late game which abuses terrain advantage, but Blizzard has done nothing about it. As of now, only 2 Zerg players remain in the top 16 of the GSL, 2 out of 16 is no where near the 'balanced' ratio of 3 races if you ask me. (I'm a Masters league player if you think I need to L2P).
Other less known cases have happened recently in tournaments whereby a whole tournament was shut down because Blizzard detected a lot of simultaneous connections from an IP address when said tournament organisers applied for it to be whitelisted way before the tournament started. That is just freaking bad business practise. Punishing your fans for competing in your supposedly eSports friendly game by shutting down their tournament? Stay classy Blizzard.
If it's to stop piracy please explain this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0om0zrJ3Qnc
Hackers have made lan support. Essentially meaning that yet again pirates get the better version of the game.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0om0zrJ3Qnc
Hackers have made lan support. Essentially meaning that yet again pirates get the better version of the game.
I hate to be that guy but MarineKing didn't win IPL4. The disconnect occurred during the Global Starcraft TEAM LEAGUE finals between Prime and Startale which was being HELD at IPL4. It was game 3 of a Best of 9 series and after the regame MarineKing would go on to win the series for his team. It was still kinda BS but at least get your facts straight.
Blizzard's always-online thing has always been about piracy, don't let them tell you otherwise. (Also one of the reasons why I'm not buying D3)
And the chatroom? That was laughed away by one of the SC2 developers. What a shame.
And good, I'm glad the fans haven't forgotten about LAN/offline play.
And the chatroom? That was laughed away by one of the SC2 developers. What a shame.
And good, I'm glad the fans haven't forgotten about LAN/offline play.
I hate to be that guy but MarineKing didn't win IPL4. The disconnect occurred during the Global Starcraft TEAM LEAGUE finals between Prime and Startale which was being HELD at IPL4. It was game 3 of a Best of 9 series and after the regame MarineKing would go on to win the series for his team. It was still kinda BS but at least get your facts straight.
@Spaz
LAN implementation will allow 3rd party programs to simulate LAN connections over the internet, which means pirated copies can use said 3rd party programs to play online through the LAN 'loophole'.
LAN implementation will allow 3rd party programs to simulate LAN connections over the internet, which means pirated copies can use said 3rd party programs to play online through the LAN 'loophole'.
@necrome: Well that's the technical part of it (I didn't know how it was specifically done), my remark was actually more sarcastic in nature. Thx for explaining the actual technical part of it though ^^.
Dear god those commentators acknowledge the crowd chanting but outright lie about what the chant is EVEN THOUGH WE CAN HEAR IT! If you don't like the chant, don't acknowledge it for crying out loud.
It's amazing how often I hear people complain about SC2's balance.. but they are always complaining about different things. Maybe the Terrans, the Protoss, AND the Zerg are all OP?
LAN, all the way. A reconnect option would be completely and utterly useless outside of tournaments.
Between the two options, LAN would be far more valuable. Ideally both could be implemented for redundancy, but LAN is, and always has been, essential. Not only would incidents like this be averted, there would no longer be major lag issues during tournaments, and we would no longer have small gatherings getting blacklisted from Battle.net.
this was the result of the computer losing connectivity to the local network
Now I know nothing about how this tournament was run but this sounds like it lost connectivity to the internet rather than the internet cutting out. Which makes it sound like they were connected wirelessly as I've never been disconnected by an ethernet cord short of it dying completely.
Now I know nothing about how this tournament was run but this sounds like it lost connectivity to the internet rather than the internet cutting out. Which makes it sound like they were connected wirelessly as I've never been disconnected by an ethernet cord short of it dying completely.
I'm actually quite happy to see this make news. It was pretty incredible to hear the audience express their discontent with the CEO of Blizzard and Lead Design of the StarCraft team sitting in the room.
ALTHOUGH, I should state, you couldn't have considered MarineKing out of it completely. The tournament rules in the GSL would have identified a number of things in the replay and then given the game; there would have been no regame. But because it was so close, it was a re.
The battle in which PartinG won was just moments previously, but he only had a handful of Stalkers and was at the forward production of MKP that was just outside his third. I believe MKP had 14 Barracks 2 Starports, so he could have had a wave or two of production since his macro in godly. And if anybody is amazingly sick with just a small squad of Marines, it is MarineKing.
PartinG didn't have any Zealots to tank, either, so stimmed Marine micro could have fended off the Stalkers and allowed MKP to stabilize.
Just saying -- MKP is the top Terran in the world right now, if not the top player. It wasn't so clear cut..
The battle in which PartinG won was just moments previously, but he only had a handful of Stalkers and was at the forward production of MKP that was just outside his third. I believe MKP had 14 Barracks 2 Starports, so he could have had a wave or two of production since his macro in godly. And if anybody is amazingly sick with just a small squad of Marines, it is MarineKing.
PartinG didn't have any Zealots to tank, either, so stimmed Marine micro could have fended off the Stalkers and allowed MKP to stabilize.
Just saying -- MKP is the top Terran in the world right now, if not the top player. It wasn't so clear cut..
Way to go! Having bought every previous Blizzard game except WC 1, I am still boycotting SCII for the loss of LAN.
I really would like to see Blizzard listen to their fans in this case. They're obviously selling games like hot cakes, but their customer-be-damned attitude stinks. I would personally never use a LAN option in a game like Diablo 3, since I feel having a battle.net character with access to the community is intrinsically part of the Diablo experience, but I think it's unnecessary to completely ostracize those who want the option without a legitimate reason. SC2 and D3 would sell insane numbers regardless of any offline/LAN option.
definitely should have put Lan mode Blizzard.
though one of my main issues with SC2 is that it didn't introduce any new species or race watsoever.
i mean if Dawn of War 40K series has around 8+ races, why can't starcraft 2 introduce new ones too???
the fact that they keep using the same 3 races is just limiting and boring.
i mean for 10 whole years you would think they would add at least 3 new playable races just to spice things up??
nope gonna cash in the SC1 success.
though one of my main issues with SC2 is that it didn't introduce any new species or race watsoever.
i mean if Dawn of War 40K series has around 8+ races, why can't starcraft 2 introduce new ones too???
the fact that they keep using the same 3 races is just limiting and boring.
i mean for 10 whole years you would think they would add at least 3 new playable races just to spice things up??
nope gonna cash in the SC1 success.
i don't play starcraft much anymore because of bullshit like that. proooolly won't get diablo 3 either. c'est la vie.
I've always thought that no LAN support was a fucking joke, laning is one of the best things to do when you can actually get some people together and play in the same building. Blizzard probably has majority of sales they will get from SC2, it's time they patch it in.
They removed LAN because back in SC:BW KeSPA used LAN to cut Blizzard out of alot of profit. So no lan to make sure anyone running a tournament has to pay them for the privilege. So a re-game feature would probably be the only option for them to implement. It's in DOTA2 IIRC so it shouldnt be too hard
In the paraphrased words of Shigeru Miyamoto, "a good game designer gives players the freedom to play the game the way THEY want to play it, not the way YOU want them to play it."
Give them LAN, Blizzard.
Give them LAN, Blizzard.
Blizzard takes lan play and local storage of campaign files away from us only after mergin with Activision. Gee, what a fucking shock.
Now they pull every bullshit excuse they can to convince us it's for the better, when all it's really about is pimping bnet, always-on drm, and "encouraging" people to use a real-money AH.
For an MMO like WoW, it's acceptable because it's the nature of the game. For SC2 and D3, it's not necessary. There's absolutely no reason to NOT do it the way they did in the older games: local for single player and lan play, remote storage and control when wanting to use bnet.
Now they pull every bullshit excuse they can to convince us it's for the better, when all it's really about is pimping bnet, always-on drm, and "encouraging" people to use a real-money AH.
For an MMO like WoW, it's acceptable because it's the nature of the game. For SC2 and D3, it's not necessary. There's absolutely no reason to NOT do it the way they did in the older games: local for single player and lan play, remote storage and control when wanting to use bnet.
LAN support will NEVER be a part of sc2 as the battle.net terms are what makes impossible for media companies to broadcast starcraft without permission from blizzard. That's the only reason for not supporting LAN, the piracy thing is just a bonus for them.
If you do some research you can find some pretty good explanations about the war over sc2 broadcasts on korea, removing lan support was the final nail in the coffin of the sc1 korean broadcasters hopes of broadcasting sc1 without depending on Blizzard.
If you still have some hope for LAN support, remember the company name: ACTIVISION Blizzard.
If you do some research you can find some pretty good explanations about the war over sc2 broadcasts on korea, removing lan support was the final nail in the coffin of the sc1 korean broadcasters hopes of broadcasting sc1 without depending on Blizzard.
If you still have some hope for LAN support, remember the company name: ACTIVISION Blizzard.
After over 10 years one would think that Blizzard could make a great sequel. Instead they didn't improve a single god damned thing about the gameplay. No formations, horrible AI the likes of which I have seen only 10 years ago, the startup sequence takes 30 times as long as the first game which is followed by long match setup sequences to make me waste more time. I love the story and the graphics but a game is hardly a game without gameplay. LAN should be mandatory for PC multiplayer games.
Also Activision is evil, so evil that they should change their name into Activevil.
Also Activision is evil, so evil that they should change their name into Activevil.
I really do hate the lack of a LAN option and always online options implemented just to prevent piracy. It's fucking retarded as shit. It makes sense for some games that heavily rely on multiplayer, like LoL, but What happened to the games of old, LAN parties and such? PC gaming was GOLDEN back then because of it. Hell, consoles had their taste of LAN excellence with Halo and such.
@Glitchmaster8: You want FORMATIONS in Starcraft? It's called micromanagement, and it relies on player skill. Dunno why you want the game to hold your hand for you...
Necrome, your example is terrible.
Taking a tier-1 unit and saying that it can destroy a tier 3 unit as evidence that the tier-1 unit is overpowered has got to be the most flawed analogy ever. Lings, cost for cost, can take out thors. Dear God, does that mean lings are OP? I guess we better nerf them.
No, if you're going to talk about a single unit's impact on the game, you have to look at its impact on the game as a whole. Starcraft 2 does not consist of Marines vs Carriers. If it did, then your argument would be valid.
But there's lots more variables to consider in whether or not a unit is OP. Like cost and cost-effectiveness. The opportunity cost of investing in this particular unit composition as opposed to another. How well they scale as time increases. Their overall effectiveness in mixed compositions. The kind of responses Toss and Zerg have against a marine-heavy composition. Look at all those myriad factors, how they interact with one another, and then come up with an argument. Don't cherry pick Marines and Carriers and throw it in people's faces as evidence of OP-ness. That's just poor reasoning.
That said, your general point that there's balance issues involving Terran is pretty accurate. Something about that race just feels off, but God knows what it is. Part of it is the sheer cost effectiveness of stimmed marines and their ungodly dps that can stand up to practically any composition terran/zerg/toss can throw at it. Part of it is the obnoxious efficiency of mules, and how the Terran macro mechanic bears no relation to the other races' macro mechanics. Part of it is how effective concussive shells is at controlling early, low army number engagements. There's so many tiny, niggling issues with Terran that eventually just sum up to them feeling slightly OP. There's no silver bullet that you can really point to, just a bunch of things that just seem slightly off.
Taking a tier-1 unit and saying that it can destroy a tier 3 unit as evidence that the tier-1 unit is overpowered has got to be the most flawed analogy ever. Lings, cost for cost, can take out thors. Dear God, does that mean lings are OP? I guess we better nerf them.
No, if you're going to talk about a single unit's impact on the game, you have to look at its impact on the game as a whole. Starcraft 2 does not consist of Marines vs Carriers. If it did, then your argument would be valid.
But there's lots more variables to consider in whether or not a unit is OP. Like cost and cost-effectiveness. The opportunity cost of investing in this particular unit composition as opposed to another. How well they scale as time increases. Their overall effectiveness in mixed compositions. The kind of responses Toss and Zerg have against a marine-heavy composition. Look at all those myriad factors, how they interact with one another, and then come up with an argument. Don't cherry pick Marines and Carriers and throw it in people's faces as evidence of OP-ness. That's just poor reasoning.
That said, your general point that there's balance issues involving Terran is pretty accurate. Something about that race just feels off, but God knows what it is. Part of it is the sheer cost effectiveness of stimmed marines and their ungodly dps that can stand up to practically any composition terran/zerg/toss can throw at it. Part of it is the obnoxious efficiency of mules, and how the Terran macro mechanic bears no relation to the other races' macro mechanics. Part of it is how effective concussive shells is at controlling early, low army number engagements. There's so many tiny, niggling issues with Terran that eventually just sum up to them feeling slightly OP. There's no silver bullet that you can really point to, just a bunch of things that just seem slightly off.
my greatest moments in gaming are hardly being forever alone collecting ladder points in SC2, but of LAN parties in a friends basement with lots of mountain dew
i will not be buying Diablo III unless LAN support comes
i will not be buying Diablo III unless LAN support comes
meh. just not buying blizzard anymore, they're too much of a brand at this point. It seems they are banking everything on their threy're established franchises, which is fine, but i can't help but think that they will stagnate in their own worlds, being that they are now just too big to change. And it's been a while since they brought something new to the table.
meh. just not buying blizzard anymore, they're too much of a brand at this point. It seems they are banking everything on their established franchises, which is fine, but i can't help but think that they will stagnate in their own worlds, being that they are now just too big to change. And it's been a while since they brought something new to the table.
follow
