| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (30)

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 6:22PM Tonezorz said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
No LAN still = No Purchase from me.
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 6:35PM Offensive Bias said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I can kinda understand this...but why is it such a big deal anymore? Most people seem to have some sort of high-speed connection in their houses now, a cheap splitter is readily available just about anywhere, and every dorm I've seen has at least high speed internet if not a full wireless set up.

In fact, at my school, it's been easier to run a game online rather than setting up a LAN and that goes for both consoles and PC games. So what exactly is it about the lack of LAN support that is such a huge deal that you won't purchase this game?
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 6:41PM Tonezorz said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Speed, reliability, quick connection, etc.

Cram a ton of people on the same 5meg dsl connection, with half the people playing other games / browsing the internet/ etc, and show me it still works flawlessly through bnet...
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 6:58PM mrln said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Because it costs money to go online.
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 7:13PM rTwelve said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
For every Starcraft 2 you don't buy I will buy three.




.....That doesn't work out so well.
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 7:37PM DevilSei said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It isn't a deal breaker, but there is no excuse not to include it. No one cares about their achievement system, not so much that if LAN didn't let you get them no one would play. Its a fair trade off.
And personally, I don't like the idea of Battle.Net running constantly. I'd rather it start up like it does normally. If I want to get on and use it, I'll play online, I don't need it eating up memory and space when I have no interest in going online with it.
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 7:53PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
so far this still boils down to nothing other than a copyright protection scheme no matter what way i look at it. i know that the star craft team keeps reiterating all this talk about battle net integration and stat tracking and how integration is impossible if they include lan support, but i really cant get behind such obvious schill when i just saw proof positive of stat tracking and lan support working just fine side by side during an office game of cod4.

and for everyone saying that lan support is no longer necessary in todays internet driven society. i will once again use my office as an example. our lovely fire wall has no chance of letting starcraft through. so even if we wanted to use our internet connection to play with the person in the cubicle next to us, we can't.

also i haven't really heard anything about this but will starcraft 2 have the ability for "spawn" installations or have they phased that out too in favor of increased control and stat tracking. because i think that would at least address some peoples fears if they knew that they can still play with their friends through spawn installs.

any way best of luck to blizzard and all the lovely hackers who will make the pirated version of a product once again more useful then retail.

cheers!

Shaden79
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 8:24PM sukru said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
They should also think about tournaments or big game expos. There will be hundreds of machines in a competition, and online lag will be a big issue, especially if the tournament is professional (i.e.: there is money involved).
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 8:38PM Crusty Magic said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Don't know why you got down rated.

Anywho, LAN is a big deal and I hope they change their mind by the time the game ships.

Also, excellent article.
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 8:51PM Ordeith said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The delay was caused from all the extra time it took to comment out the LAN play code.
Reply

Posted: Aug 18th 2009 12:39AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Cram a ton of people on the same 5meg dsl connection, with half the people playing other games / browsing the internet/ etc, and show me it still works flawlessly through bnet...

Battle.Net has always been for match-making. Once you enter the game, data is transmitted directly between players. If you're on the same LAN, your dsl connection doesn't matter.

But that was the case in my Starcraft I days. For all I know Battle.Net in Starcraft II will bounce your packets off the moon.
Reply

Posted: Aug 20th 2009 2:14AM Draken Stark said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I live up in alaska where hi speed internet is at least 90 dollars a month. I would very much screw achievments in order to play a non laggy game with local friends of mine. Seems like I'm totally screwed with my 1.5~0.5 megabit internet.
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 6:29PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I do have to agree that the no lan sucks, but nowadays I don't have a use for it :( However, I am still gonna get it cause I've enjoyed SC from the moment i was introduced to it way back when.

Now if only Blizzcon would hurry up and start already >.> the anticipation is lame.
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 6:55PM einhanderkiller said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That was a nice interview.
Reply

Posted: Aug 18th 2009 2:44AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Reply

Posted: Aug 21st 2009 2:25AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Much, much thanks!

You too, Crusty Magic!
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 6:57PM mrln said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm not too excited about paying for Battle.net for LAN, but you still have to buy the game for the single-player. And level-editing side-scrollers.
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 7:02PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Since when do you have to pay to play online?
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 7:29PM einhanderkiller said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The interview said that playing StarCraft 2 online is FREE.
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 7:43PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The no LAN isn't a big deal for me as I play over BNet all the time anyways. I can see how it could impact a lot of people though, I remember running 8 player matches in the original game with everyone on dial-up. It wasn't pretty. Hook those same peoples up over a LAN and the performance increase was evident.

But who has dial-up these days anymore anyway right...
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 8:17PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well you can probably still play the first one for LAN if it's that important.....
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 8:24PM R Planteer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
When the crack that comes out that lets me play this w/o Bnet monitoring my every movement (and hopefully adds in LAN play) Blizzard will get some of my money.
Reply

Posted: Aug 17th 2009 9:59PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That was a damn good interview for all parties involved. The insight on how such a successful and well-known developer operates on a work-related level is interesting. Also, the questions from Joystiq were both honest and knowledgeable. With the current argument about the quality of gaming journalism such a heated debate, I find it respectable and appreciated that Kevin seems to have a both a personal and professional enthusiasm about the creation and enjoyment of a video game.

I'll be keeping my eye here for more information on Blizzard's next gem.
Reply

Posted: Aug 21st 2009 2:22AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Joshua,

Much thanks! You have no idea how much comments like this keep us going.
Reply

Posted: Aug 18th 2009 12:09AM RageOverdose said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
LAN is integral part to competition in Starcraft. The removal of it probably has many reasons, and controlling the potential money mine that is Korean Starcraft is probably one of them.

And one issue of it's removal is lag. If you compare LAN to Battle.net, even the lowest latency setting has a noticeable delay compared to LAN (of course, that could JUST be the framework of Battle.net itself). Even in the latency-fixed private servers such as The Abyss (for ICCup players) and the growing SC2GG server, while the lag is better than Blizzard's Battle.net, it still isn't as good as regular old LAN play. And at the level that eSports Starcraft is at, that lag can mean a big difference (these guys time things by the second, so it's a big deal if there is significant delay because they have to use an Internet connection).

But it does suck that Starcraft 2 seems to be pushed further back. I'm not going to say I didn't expect it, since it is Blizzard, but I'm really wanting to get this game asap. The transition will be pretty epic for sure.
Reply

Posted: Aug 18th 2009 12:20AM RageOverdose said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I say "seems to be pushed back," since I misread the article like a nub.

I hate it when games I want so bad seem so far away in this plateau we call time.
Reply

Posted: Aug 18th 2009 12:34AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
LAN is important, and it is an opportunity lost

If you live on either the left or right coast, you are spoiled with broadband. According to Washington Post, over 60% of the US does not have access to Broadband. Maybe Blizzard is happy with the whatever they get because it pays the bills.

Also, LAN parties are more social and plenty of people get together to play Xbox and even have game nights.

A simple solution, sell a LAN PACK. A pack of 2 to 4 CDs all bundled together and big time reduced price and have LAN support. This also helps families with multiple people who like to play. Note that both Apple and Microsoft even have Family Packs for the their OS, a LAN PACK would be innovative. Sure, they would sell fewer but that is probably far fewer than would otherwise be pirated. Hey, and guess what -- people who like the game will ecourage others -- and when that expansion pack comes out, more people will purchase it.

There is always a smarter way to go about things....some companies should try that sometime!
Reply

Posted: Aug 18th 2009 4:29AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
CDs?! huh? Why not just ship it on floppy disks and force the install in DOS so the whole redundant package is complete.
Reply

Posted: Aug 18th 2009 12:40AM drunkenpandaren said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What makes Battle.net 2.0 so glorious over such systems already in place like GFWL or Steamworks?
Reply

Posted: Aug 18th 2009 11:36PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
No lan = no purchase for me
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Remedy not done with Alan Wake

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 10:30AM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW