Nameless Voice on 2/7/2009 at 15:26
Well, why not bother?
I can hardly see LAN play being that difficult to implement when they already have the Internet-based connections working.
People play SC as a sport in big convention halls, it certainly makes sense to use a much faster LAN connection in that case rather than going over the Internet.
Remember that not everyone has access to decent broadband, or any broadband.
Also, what about two friends with laptops who want to play SC against each other where there's no free wifi hotspots or other Internet access around?
Dresden on 2/7/2009 at 15:36
I'm guessing the "Friends with laptops but no wifi" situation is in the minority of gamers.
Koki on 2/7/2009 at 15:38
Quote Posted by Brethren
Back to the LAN issue - now, I've never played SC over a LAN, or even been to a LAN party of any kind, and I'm sure I'll get some nerd rage here, but in this day and age, is this
really that big of a deal?
Well think about it genius. LAN = zero lag. Internet = hovewer the fuck Blizzard's server currently feels like lag. Ya dig?
Argument about piracy and Hamachi is weak. Hamachi is too small and more importantly not commercial enough, so it's much more of a stand-in than a replacement. Playing with people from my own country I get as much lag as to USA on official servers.
But what really I want to know is how the fuck is that supposed to work with professional matches. SC is huge on pro scene, that's a no-brainer, and SC2 is being heavily designed with competitivity in mind, that's also a no-brainer, and now no LAN mode? So the two players sitting in booths five meters away from each other have to be routed through a server five rice fields away just so Blizzard can get their kicks?
Doesn't make any sense.
EvaUnit02 on 2/7/2009 at 15:49
Quote Posted by Dresden
I'm guessing the "Friends with laptops but no wifi" situation is in the minority of gamers.
Since when did ad-hoc wireless networking require an internet connection? Nameless Voice's point still stands.
Nameless Voice on 2/7/2009 at 15:53
Quote Posted by Dresden
I'm guessing the "Friends with laptops but no wifi" situation is in the minority of gamers.
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
Since when did ad-hoc wireless networking require an internet connection? Nameless Voice's point still stands.
This exactly. I wasn't talking about laptops without wifi, I was talking about laptops without access to wifi
hotspots.
Renault on 2/7/2009 at 16:22
Quote Posted by Koki
Well think about it genius. LAN = zero lag. Internet = hovewer the fuck Blizzard's server currently feels like lag. Ya dig?
:rolleyes:
I never said I didn't understand the concept of a LAN (thanks for fulfilling the nerd rage prophecy though). I asked if there are that many people playing multiplayer this way (on a LAN) that Blizzard would give a shit.
Do you understand the difference?
Nameless Voice on 2/7/2009 at 16:25
As has been said before, surely people playing at conventions?
Though Blizzard probably want to organise and host conventions and leagues through battle.net . . .
EvaUnit02 on 2/7/2009 at 16:31
Quote Posted by Brethren
(thanks for fulfilling the nerd rage prophecy though).
Nerd rage prophecy? Oh my God, grow up already.
If you can't maintain a conversation without the ad hominem attacks then you know where Thiefgen is.
Matthew on 2/7/2009 at 16:44
I would have thought that, as popular as I understand Starcraft to be at tournaments, the dropping of the LAN option would be quite a blow to such practices. Or perhaps South Korea will get a modified version? :p
nicked on 2/7/2009 at 17:42
But apart from the minority of people who don't have access to an internet connection for whatever reason, playing over the internet in the same room as someone is, from the player's point of view, identical. It's just like using a very, very long cable really.
That said, I really don't see how they benefit from leaving it out.
