No LAN in my StarCraft 2

[Shannow]

Possibly you will have to pay for something like a premium account. You will still be able to play free in basic form. I wouldnt worry about it.

"Don't worry, you'll be fine", they said as they were building a fire under the cauldron he was sitting in.
And boil, he did.

So what is a premium acc?

 

[catfood]

Possibly you will have to pay for something like a premium account. You will still be able to play free in basic form. I wouldnt worry about it.

"Don't worry, you'll be fine", they said as they were building a fire under the cauldron he was sitting in.
And boil, he did.

So what is a premium acc?

Probably some bullshit like choosing your own custom avatar and crap like that.

 

[1eyedking]

LAN parties, man. Didn't these guys have them? WHO THE FUCKING HELL IS RUNNING THE INDUSTRY NOW?!

 

[entertainer]

LAN parties, man. Didn't these guys have them? WHO THE FUCKING HELL IS RUNNING THE INDUSTRY NOW?!

Money.

 

[Tails]

Blizzard rep has told Kotaku:

We don't currently plan to support LAN play with StarCraft II, as we are building Battle.net to be the ideal destination for multiplayer gaming with StarCraft II and future Blizzard Entertainment games. While this was a difficult decision for us, we felt that moving away from LAN play and directing players to our upgraded Battle.net service was the best option to ensure a quality multiplayer experience with StarCraft II and safeguard against piracy.

Several Battle.net features like advanced communication options, achievements, stat-tracking, and more, require players to be connected to the service, so we're encouraging everyone to use Battle.net as much as possible to get the most out of StarCraft II. We're looking forward to sharing more details about Battle.net and online functionality for StarCraft II in the near future.

Yeah riiight. I just love when Devs or Publishers take actions against piracy that work in different way then they would like to... Spore anyone?

 

[OccupatedVoid]

This is the new Blizzard folks. It's all about teh money.

 

[Avu]

I'm guessing having a country worth of taxpayers ehm I mean subscribers isn't enough for them...

 

[MetalCraze]

we felt that moving away from LAN play and directing players to our upgraded Battle.net service was the best option to ensure a quality multiplayer experience with StarCraft II and safeguard against piracy.

Haha fucking Blizzard jews. B.net = quality? Since when? Now instead of playing on a server I want/LAN party I will have to play on some shitty B.net server half a world away?
Blizzard can go fuck themselves with their $150 for a game with shitty MP service.

 

[Darth Roxor]

This is the new Blizzard folks. It's all about teh money.

This is the new shit

 

[Major_Boobage]

This is the new Blizzard folks. It's all about teh money.

This is the new shit

New shit? Wow has been out for years.

 

[Jim Cojones]

Several Battle.net features like advanced communication options, achievements, stat-tracking, and more, require players to be connected to the service

They try to say that playing on LAN wouldn't make sense because you don't have access to "advanced communication options"? More advanced than speaking directly to the friends being in the same room? What would it be? Support for telepathy?

Achievements and stat-tracking? What?

 

[Major_Boobage]

Several Battle.net features like advanced communication options, achievements, stat-tracking, and more, require players to be connected to the service

They try to say that playing on LAN wouldn't make sense because you don't have access to "advanced communication options"? More advanced than speaking directly to the friends being in the same room? What would it be? Support for telepathy?

Achievements and stat-tracking? What?

Great improvements!

 

[Hamster]

As a devoted single-player gamer i piss on your juvenile scorn. :wink:
Starcraft 2's single-player content looks good so far and i will gladly pay 150$ for it.

 

[Tails]

I wonder what will Blizzard do if lots of their customers start to demand LAN in D3 and SC2. Blizzard always was described as the only company that truly listens fans requests.

 

[thesheeep]

I wonder what will Blizzard do if lots of their customers start to demand LAN in D3 and SC2. Blizzard always was described as the only company that truly listens fans requests.

Who came up with that one?

 

[Lyric Suite]

Can anybody explain to me just WTF is this thing supposed to be?

http://www.shacknews.com/screenshots.x? ... 110#132833

Blizzard = fail.

 

[Kraszu]

Can anybody explain to me just WTF is this thing supposed to be?

http://www.shacknews.com/screenshots.x? ... 110#132833

Blizzard = fail.

1 of 4 from set Terra-Tron April Fools.

Fail.

 

[Tails]

I wonder what will Blizzard do if lots of their customers start to demand LAN in D3 and SC2. Blizzard always was described as the only company that truly listens fans requests.

Who came up with that one?

Every Blizz fan that I talk to claimed this.

Can anybody explain to me just WTF is this thing supposed to be?

http://www.shacknews.com/screenshots.x? ... 110#132833

Blizzard = fail.

April fools?

 

[Lumpy]

That's the April Fool's joke.

 

[Lyric Suite]

Bah, that teaches me to shit-cock without having had my coffee first.

 

[Silellak]

As a devoted single-player gamer i piss on your juvenile scorn. :wink:
Starcraft 2's single-player content looks good so far and i will gladly pay 150$ for it.

You, apparently, have far too much money, and should share it with the rest of us.

I would love to join in the nerd-rage here, but after Blizzard pulled their "trilogy" bullshit with the single player game, it immediately fell into my "maybe-buy-this-after-10-years-or-so" list. So, it's hard to really care what other stupid shit they do with their game. Yes, removing LAN is a dumb decision, but it still pales next to their "our game is worth $150" horseshit.

I'm fairly sure Battle.Net will eventually become a pay service, once people are hooked on Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2. Blizzard can just bundle a Battle.Net subscription in with a WoW subscription and, eventually, a subscription to the inevitable World of Starcraft.

$5 - Monthly access to our award-winning Battle.Net multiplayer service
$15 - Monthly access to the Battle.Net multiplayer service and the number-one-ranked MMO in the world, World of Warcraft
$20 - Monthly access to Battle.Net, World of Warcraft, and the newly-released hit game World of Starcraft

 

[Kingston]

Yea, this is pretty lame alright. Not sure if I'll buy SC2 now. I liked the first one a lot especially due to the atmosphere. I sucked at the game as I generally do in RTS games (even though I enjoy playing them), so I'm not even that interested in multiplayer. Only having a Terran campaign also sucks. Besides, the atmosphere I crave probably won't be there. I'm pretty sure it'll be like WC3 was to WC2. So yea.. meh.

 

[MetalCraze]

There won't be World of Starcraft, because it's sci-fi, sci fi doesn't sell as well as fantasy.
It will be a World of Diablo considering that a new MMO is already announced and look at D3 gameplay - it already looks like a bridge between Diablo and WoW.

I imagine the Cattle.net emulators will appear soon, even more niche (irony) NFS-U got one pretty fast.

Also SC2 gameplay from previews looks too fishy to me. Whereas in SC it was all about balance between unique sides here it looks more like rock-paper-scissors - think Homeworld 2.

 

[SlyDrak]

--

 

[Darth Roxor]

When you buy Starcraft 2, you buy communism.