no LAN support for SC2?

killingpeople

http://www.incgamers.com/Interviews/190/StarCraftIIDevelopersInterviewed?gr_i_ni

Will StarCraft II be available on consoles, or over LAN?

We got quite different answers about local area networking (LAN), where both Dustin or Sigaty said they were still discussing it, however, Pardo knew immediately: "we don't have any plans to support LAN," he said and clarified "we will not support it." The only multiplayer available will be on Battle.net."

i LAN gaming. i dont' do it much, but i love it. so at first, my knee-jerk response was, "where's padme...?"
but, i'm wondering what you think, will Blizzard not supporting LAN play for StarCraft 2 even be that big of a big deal? does this mean the game can't or will be difficult to be played at a LAN party? like, all this means is that we require an internet connection in order to play multi-player. i just don't get why they wouldn't support LAN play. i'm assuming it has something to do with the new battle.net service, to funnel more users through the service. i'm sure it will workout, but the main reason i was stoked about StarCraft 2 was to get it going at a LAN party, because you just KNOW that game is perfect for that scene and there just aren't very many good new games out now for LAN gaming.

http://www.joystiq.com/2009/06/29/lan-support-not-included-in-starcraft-ii/

If this is true, Battle.net is the only multiplayer option in StarCraft II, and the era of the LAN party has officially ended

you dare utter such ignorance! you shut your whorish mouth JC Fletcher! you know not what you speak of!

TheWinterLord

no LAN support for SC2?
I think you can go LAN aslong as you are also connected to Battle net.

dfacto

Most likely a measure to stop piracy, as right now you can play War3 or Starcraft over LAN programs like Garena. But I'm thinking someone will figure out a way to get around that within a few days of release anyways.

Wells

PixelMasher

yea its gotta be an anti piracy thing, so people cant swap around 1 copy at a lan and noCD crack it for like 20 people. people will find ways around it anyways just like the free wow servers and such.

bounchfx

I'm positive that there will still be a way to connect and play over a personal network after authenticating with B.Net, though I do still hope there is a way to play over your network without being connected to the internet - can we get any confirmation of this sorta stuff blizz guys?

puhleeasse

JFletcher

you dare utter such ignorance! you shut your whorish mouth JC Fletcher! you know not what you speak of!

That took a couple seconds to absorb.

I dont think it will be that big of a deal, or maybe it will be through battle.net like thewinterlord mentioned.

Zwebbie

Back in the day, some Blizzard games had spawned copies - you could install a LAN version to play with other people, but it'd have no singleplayer. I still think that'd be a way better method of combating piracy.

From the 90's gameplay, to multiple episodes, from videos with such strategies as blocking building space to this kind of stuff, I'm almost convinced that Blizzard entered a bet that they could release a dumb game and still sell more than the competition.

Mark Dygert

I don't mind the game checking in to make sure its legit. I hope they allow actual LAN traffic though. It would really suck and be unusable if the only way to play locally would be to connect to battle.net.

dfacto

you could install a LAN version to play with other people, but it'd have no singleplayer. I still think that'd be a way better method of combating piracy.

Considering Blizzard games are massively popular because of their multiplayer only, that would be a pointless strategy that would change nothing. Instead of pirating copies, people could just distribute a spawn installer and the end effect would be the same. Basically what they're doing right now is the best way they can fight piracy.

Except I guarantee that sc2 games will be available over LAN programs within a month of release with no authentication required regardless.

JohnnyRaptor

which proper lan party worth its name doesnt offer internet anyway ?

TSM

Exactly Jonny -- this would only effect the 0.02% of people that do not have internet connection, but still have a local network at their house? Seems to me, that most people who do NOT have internet also do not have local networks either (aside the technicality in regards to printers, scanners, etc).

I don't mind the B.NET only option. Blizzard has proved their reliability with this type of thing through WoW. Whether or not piracy is the primary reason for the decision, I honestly think it's a good and healthy move.

We'll have to see, though.

Mark Dygert

It's not a matter of just being connected to the net but slamming a lot of (what could easily be handled via LAN) traffic through a much smaller, less efficient pipe.

Some companies have put in place a bandwidth limit and you're in danger of not only being charged an insane rate if you go over but being dropped all together. Which is pointless since the traffic can easily be handled locally. Checking in with Battle.net shouldn't be an issue, but the traffic shouldn't go through it, that's a pretty big waste on all fronts, but I guess if the benefits out weight the costs its worth it.

Zwebbie

dfacto wrote:

Considering Blizzard games are massively popular because of their multiplayer only, that would be a pointless strategy that would change nothing. Instead of pirating copies, people could just distribute a spawn installer and the end effect would be the same. Basically what they're doing right now is the best way they can fight piracy.

I think you're massively overestimating the number of people that play multiplayer. I don't have any hard data on Blizzard games here, but there was a poll on Planet Command&Conquer where it showed that one in five people wouldn't buy an RTS that didn't have any multiplayer (and that's of the fan-site visiting people, whom I assume are more likely to play online). Dawn of War II's multiplayer beta had half of its games played against bots, despite them being ridiculously underdeveloped and considered unplayable. Again, I have no hard data, but I must honestly express my doubt that multiplayer is what sells. And I think that the number of people who play LAN solely are so small, that spawned copies wouldn't result in any noticable loss of sales - in fact, I think people who have a spawned copy are more likely to buy the game than people who have an illegal copy.

Richard Kain

Yeah, what gives? I know LAN parties aren't as common as they used to be, what with high-speed internet being so much more affordable these days. But spawn copies were one of the best things from the original Starcraft. This isn't just a matter of removing spawn copies, they are removing all support for local LAN multiplayer.

Sigh. I suppose it isn't all that big of an issue in the long run. If you have friends over, you can still all play Starcraft II. You will just all have to be hooked up the internet to do it. In these days of innexpensive wireless routers, it isn't all that hard to set up. It isn't a problem so much as it is a performance issue. Everyone knows that the best way to get seamless, stable multiplayer is with a LAN. Again, it isn't as much an issue with an RTS as it would be for an FPS, but the principle is the same.

I guarantee that this move has nothing to do with improving services or providing additional multiplayer features, and everything to do with combatting piracy.

Zwebbie, yes, multiplayer IS what sells, especially for Blizzard titles. All of the most recent Blizzard titles have had very strong multiplayer components, and thriving multiplayer communities long after their release. Starcraft, Diablo II, and Warcraft III had immense on-line communities that drastically increased the longevity of those titles. Multiplayer is a big deal. It's just local multiplayer that isn't as big of a deal as it used to be.

dfacto

The thing is Zwebbie, C&C games just aren't anywhere nearly as popular as Blizzard's RTS outings. Starcraft is still actively played on B.net, and LAN services, and War3 is still extremely popular 7 years after release. SC2 is very likely to be the same story, meaning that its multiplayer will be a big reason to buy the game and a source of money years after release as people continue to buy the game (as has happened with other Blizzard titles that are still available at fairly high prices due to demand, like Diablo2 or War3)

I'd say Blizzard is trying to force those post-release and future players to buy the game rather than allowing them to pirate it and still enjoy multiplayer. Could be wrong though.

killingpeople

JFletcher wrote: »

That took a couple seconds to absorb.

oh hello... oops AHhaha, not you, the joystiq journalist one

adam

Since SC (and undoubtedly SC2) will be a HUGE product for competitions/tournaments, they'll have support for LAN gaming, just not in the direct-connect sense. You'll likely need to authentic to BNet before finding a local game.

TWilson

I'm sure north AND south Korea will target blizzard with their nukes if they're not able to play SC2 over LAN. I wouldn't worry about it too much!

Richard Kain

adam wrote: »

Since SC (and undoubtedly SC2) will be a HUGE product for competitions/tournaments, they'll have support for LAN gaming, just not in the direct-connect sense. You'll likely need to authentic to BNet before finding a local game.

Okay, now THAT would make sense. Removing support for LAN play altogether just doesn't add up for a title like Starcraft. Requiring that players be logged into Battle.NET if they want to play local multiplayer matches? That is a bit more reasonable than removing the feature altogether.

Sure, it would be a touch of DRM bastardry. But with modern piracy, you can't really blame them.

flaagan

Anyone up for some $C2? Just a minor fee to play! !

Cojax

What the big deal anyway? Like someone else said earlier, what LAN doesn't have internet these days? I can understand LAN over bnet for tournaments, so it would be likely to authenticate through bnet first in order to establish a LAN connection. At least i hope so

dfacto

Can't say I care much since I intend to buy SC2 and play it on b.net until my fingers fall off.

Though at some point, after the game has been out for a sufficiently long time the LAN networks can actually contain more players that are at a higher level. A good example is DoTA games for War3, where Garena has more stable connections and less leavers than b.net.

oXYnary

JohnnyRaptor wrote: »

which proper lan party worth its name doesnt offer internet anyway ?

The smaller ones (under 12 people) where they rent space. You cant make that judgment.

Peris

Even the crappy garage LAN me and some friends have every year has internet, so it doesn't really seem like a weird decision.

7point83hertz

I'm sure it's going to be hacked for LAN support very soon after publishing.

oXYnary

Let me give an example. Bob Billy and Sarah ride the bus together everyday to and from work. They all have laptops, and Bob has an extra wireless usb card he can set as a hub. They decide to play games together on these trips.


Mike, Sam, George, and Phil all hang out at the park alot waiting for their events to happen. They decide to have a LAN between them.

Saying the net is easy everywhere. Especially on the move is shortsighted. I had to push for LAN support for some of our games because our audience especially cannot be simply thought to have net and especially BROADBAND wherever they are.

What if they are behind a firewall they cannot access that blocks that port to outside the lan itself?

I realize this is more an aside, I just hate the assumptions that people have these days about first net access, and second consistent or high speed access.

adam

People playing Starcraft in the park deserved to be rained on.

Peris

oXYnary wrote: »

Let me give an example. Bob Billy and Sarah ride the bus together everyday to and from work. They all have laptops, and Bob has an extra wireless usb card he can set as a hub. They decide to play games together on these trips.

I wonder if this EVER happens at all, especially with a girl like Sarah involved. Who the hell plays lan games on their laptops on the bus???

tanka

I don't have a huge deal with SC2 not having LAN; but in Australia and many other countries, ISPs have bandwidth restrictions on their broadband plans, and after reaching these limits your internet gets slowed down to a godawful speed. It happens quite often to alot of people, and I'd hate to think that I wouldn't be able to play a LAN game in my household because the internet was slow.

If it only required Battle.net for authentication I wouldn't mind so at all, as there will most probably be multiple copies of starcraft in my household anyway. It's a bit of a douchebag move from blizzard, but you can't really blame them.

bounchfx

Joey and Suzy are going scuba diving. they get halfway to the reef and decide they want to play Starcraft 2 while swimming the rest of the way there over LAN... but oh no! SC2 doesn't support it. What are they going to do!?

dfacto

Don't scoff. I've been on the "have shitty internet while everyone else enjoys broadband" bus, and it's fucking lame, especially with Steam games.

killingpeople

Milly and Lester are mountain climbing. halfway up a sheer cliff face, they both get the mean urge to play some StarCraft 2. They wip out their laptops, insert their StarCraft 2 disks and set up a LAN. Blizzard killed LAN parties and hates mountain climbers.