What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
567 Comments
- Joxterthemighty, on 07/01/2009, -24/+319Total deal breaker, no lan play then I am not buying. I am sure that some kind of Lan play crack will come out from the community so I will wait for that before even considering this game purchase. If all the talk from ISP's about bandwidth caps turns out to be true then this kind of business model is doomed to failure, who wants to eat up thier bandwidth just to play with someone in the same darn room?
- aphexcoil, on 07/01/2009, -3/+229The entire software industry is going down the wrong path. I am in my early 30's and I remember when companies like ID Software actually gave a ***** about their loyal fans and would give out a third of the game for free to try out. If people liked it, they bought it.
Most game companies today are so paranoid and so "corporate" that they forgot how awesome it was when some programmers sat around for weeks on end to make a game that people loved and then got millions from them because -- and get this -- not everyone is going to steal.
Instead of taking the "we worked hard on this so we'd really appreciate if you'd spend $40 bucks on this and that will allow us to make cool future games for you" route, they now take the, "everyone is a pirate so we're going to cripple our games so that nobody gets a free copy" path.
ATTENTION GAME COMPANIES:
When you start treating your fans with some respect and take the occasional pirated game as a cost of doing business, we'll start buying more of your stuff. Why aren't you listening to us when we tell you that removing a feature or crippling a game just to prevent piracy is just bad business.
Reminds me of a quote from the movie Tron:
Ed Dillinger: Encom isn't the business you started in your garage anymore. We're billing accounts in thirty different countries; new defense systems; we have one of the most sophisticated pieces of equipment in existence.
Dr. Walter Gibbs: Oh, I know all that. [starts for the elevator] Sometimes I wish I were back in my garage.
Ed Dillinger: That can be arranged, Walter.
Dr. Walter Gibbs: [stops and turns back to Dillinger, visibly angry] That was uncalled for! You know, you can remove men like Alan and me from the system, but we helped create it! And our spirit remains in every program we design for this computer!
Ed Dillinger: Walter, it's getting late. I've got better things to do than to have religious discussions with you. Don't worry about ENCOM anymore; it's out of your hands now.
(Replace ENCOM with Activision, EA, Blizzard, etc.) - redleviathan69, on 07/01/2009, -4/+228"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."
The thing is, I don't care about all that *****. Stop trying to distract me from the game I want to play. By being on LAN, you forfeit the right to be stat tracked. Ok, I understand that. I don't care if I'm not. Give me the damn game and stop telling me that every game is better if I can look back on statistics and say, "gee remember when I did that? That was swell." - LoneWolf01, on 07/01/2009, -3/+197Do Blizzard know that people still have LAN parties without the internet?
- mrdatawolf, on 07/01/2009, -7/+197No rational person at Blizzard is looking at the piracy numbers and thinking they need to fix it. They have been getting sales on SC for over a DECADE! Now they plan on "fixing" that with copy protection, right.
I think this shows that this is not *Blizzard* who makes RTS games this is blizzard the WOW company showing just how much they have lost touch with the SC gamer. They will sell tons of copies... but you won't see SCII being bought in a decade. - Canadianinjapan, on 07/01/2009, -6/+141Blizzard just lost a sale. I'm still going to play it though.......
- inactive, on 07/01/2009, -11/+140...............…………..„--~~""”¯¯¯””~~-„……………………………………...........
…………………..„-~”:::::::::::::::::::::::::”~,………………………………………….
……………….„~”,:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::”-,………………………………….......
…………….../;;;;;;|::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::……………………………............
……………..|;;;;;;;/:::::::””~~--::::::::::::::-~~”::……………………………...........
……………./”~,;;/:::::::/¯¯¯¯¯’:::::::::::/’¯¯¯¯’………………………….........
……………. º: ¯:::::::: . . • . ,/::::::::::„ . • . ,/……………………………….......
……………/’::::::::::::::::”~~~”:::::/””~::::’”~~”.::’,………………………………….
………….../:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::’,__„„/’:::::::::::’………………………………...
…………..|:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::„----„_„---,::::::::::………………………...........
…………..|:::::::::::::::::::::::::::„~"----„__„„-“::::::::::|………………………….......
…………..|::::::::::::::::::::::::::/’;;;;;;;;;/:::DAMN BLIZZARD, YOU COLD!
………..„~”:::::::::::::::::::::::::__;;;;;;--„::::::::::::::/……..
……..,-“;:; .,::::::::::::::::::::::::’„_¯¯¯„-“:::::::::::::/………………………….........
….„~”;:;:;:;, .”~„::::::::::::::::::::::::¯¯¯:::::::::::::,-“;………………………...........
.,~”;:;:;:;;:;:;:”-, . ”~--„:::::::::::::~--„„___„„~“::::„-‘ . |;:'”~-„…………………………
“;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;”-, . . .”~~---„„„„_______„„„--~” . ./ |;:;:’;:;”-,……………………...
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;____;:;”-, ~-„ . . . . . . . . /;;;;;’, . . .,/ . |;:,~”;:;:;”-,……………..........
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;/;:;:;:;”~, “~-„_ . . . /„;;;;;;;/”-„~” . . |;:;”~„;:;:;:;’……………….....
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:/;:;:;:;:;:;:”~„ . .¯”~-’ . “~,;;;’ . . . . .|;:;:;:;|;:;:;:;:;’…………….....
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;”~--„;:;:;:;:;:”~„ . . . . . .|;;;;;;’ . . . |;:;:;:;/;:;:”~,;:;:………………
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:”~--„;:;:;:;:”~„ . . . |;;;;;;;;’, . .|;:;:;:/;:;:;:;:;’;:;:………........
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:”~-„;:;:;:”~„ .|;;;;;;;;;;;”~,|;:;:;/;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:……………
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:|;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:”~-„;:;:”~„;;;;;;;;;;;;/;:;,/’;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;;:;:…...........
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:|,/;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:”~-„;”~„;;;;;;/;:,/;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;;:;:'……......
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:/;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;”~-„’,;/ ,/;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:|…........
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;|;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:¯„/;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;|;:;:|……….
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;|;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;|;:o;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:::;:|;:;:|...........
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;|;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;|;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:|;:;:|……….
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;|;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;|;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:|;:;:|……….
_;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;|;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;|;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:|;:;:|...........
;:;¯””~~--„„_|_;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:|;:;o;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;|-~/…….....
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:¯””~~----„„„__;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;;:;:;:;|;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;|~“………… - holyskeleton, on 07/01/2009, -14/+137"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."
so they can't make the game good enough and have to depend on these so called "features" to sell. I'm not a purist or anything but I guess anything has a beginning has an end. Let's just hope that end is still far far away. There's gotta be a way for good games and TPB to co-exist. Anyway back to my spawn copies... - TsuruchiBrian, on 07/01/2009, -4/+125Ehh... ***** this game. Besides, Blizzard needs a good failure to give their arrogance a good kick in the testicles.
I am sick of sacrificing my gameplay (that I paid for) to "potentially" (but not really) stop a few pirates. I (ME OVER HERE) am your customer that is giving you money. How about you do what I (the customer) wants? - DrCyclops, on 07/01/2009, -9/+127Reason 1: Piracy
Reason 2: Piracy
Reason 3: Piracy - bobthegreat1224, on 07/01/2009, -13/+123I don't see how excluding LAN play will increase or salvage sales. People who only wanted the game for LANs will either pirate a hacked copy or go find another game - no game is worth $50 or $60 for just LAN play. Additionally, if you're the sort of person who already pirates games is the lack of LAN really going to deter you?
I went and played through the original campaigns again a few months ago, on my legally purchased copy, solely because someone had suggested the game in the middle of an otherwise FPS LAN night and we enjoyed the heck out of it. So it seems to me that leaving LAN capabilities in the final product and allowing for spawn copies like in the original would only increase sales.
Or best of all, what about a LAN-only version at a low price point? That circumvents consumer complaints with costs, gets more copies into players' hands, serves as excellent advertisement for the full product, and still keeps the money flowing in. - tgc1, on 07/01/2009, -14/+113Reason 1: Greed
Reason 2: Profit
Reason 3: Epic-Retardation. - tgc1, on 07/01/2009, -3/+100Well that was a total non-response to the issue. Way to give us all the finger ya bunch of pricks.
It's so bizarre because about 5 years ago I used to work at this one company and we all used to play LAN Starcraft after work. The weird thing was is that we ALL purchased legit copies of the game. Because it was that good, and it was totally worth it. Not only did I purchase the game, I purchased the battlechest version with is significantly more expensive than Starcraft by itself. This was almost a full decade on from its original release. And to think that we all went out of our way to buy it, rather than pirate it or copy it should have woke Blizzard up. Hell, we also bought Diablo. I am so damned disappointed in them right now.
***** corporate goons always getting their fingers in a pie they have no business being in. Dammit. - orphenshadow, on 07/01/2009, -7/+101I think a lot of people seem to forget that the original Starcraft included spawn mode. You could install it and play Multiplayer only LAN games. It's how I was introduced to the game. And to this day. I have purchased multiple copies of SC1, and have yet to play one game on battlenet. I do not want to play with the KEKEKEKE korean kids who mop the floor with everyone. I want to play with my friends, In my house, or at a lan party.
How about this blizzard. If you are so worried about piracy. Why not focus on making a really awesome game instead of driving potential customers away? I will NOT buy the game without LAN mode, and I would prefer some form of spawn mode.
Blizzard should work on creating a really compelling and awesome single player campaign, as well as all the awesome multiplayer features, to ensure that those interested in playing online will have that option. They should also cater to those who prefer to play on a LAN by not only including LAN mode, but allowing for spawn installs of the game.
Sure there will be a few people playing the game over hamachi and other services. But is it really worth driving away your fanbase to prevent a few people who had absolutely no intention of buying the game in the first place from playing it.
Another idea, Why not have no LAN out of the box, and then have It as a patch/download that requires activation. Kind of like a dedicated server, Then release the spawn installers for free, and so long as there is a valid activated "server" on the network. The spawns will work.
Just an idea... - dobbinmon, on 07/01/2009, -3/+92BUILD THE DAMN GAME FOR THE CUSTOMERS - NOT THE PIRATES
- Earthacis, on 07/01/2009, -3/+88It sounded to me like another form of DRM. F that.
- Lavane, on 07/01/2009, -4/+88Coming up next: Battle.net subscription fees
- BertEatsDirt, on 07/01/2009, -0/+83Agreed. I'm ***** at Starcraft and play multiplayer games (over LAN) solely because it's something fun to do with your friends. The last thing I want is stats reminding me of how ***** I am!
- badenglishihave, on 07/01/2009, -0/+81Here are the "features" they described that occur naturally within a LAN setting:
1. Communication
- Guy #1 yelling at Guy #2 from across the room: "Hey get the ***** over here my base is being attacked!"
2. Achievements
- Guy #1 yelling at Guy #2 from across the room: "Haha I win, that means you have to buy the pizza."
3. Stat-tracking
- Guy #1 yelling at Guy #2 from across the room: "Ooh I win again! Let's see... I believe the score is now 87-2 in favor of me?" - icndvl, on 07/01/2009, -0/+79There will be a LAN version out, just don't look for it in stores...
- exec0extreme, on 07/01/2009, -4/+80When the ***** has any online petition accomplished anything?
- nelwa, on 07/01/2009, -3/+70In South Africa, we're used to bandwidth caps - 1GB monthly caps are normal, even 5 GB caps are expensive, and only above average income households have it... No LAN is definitely a deal breaker.
- phpirate, on 07/01/2009, -2/+68Anti-piracy is a ***** argument, its only going to make it worse. WoW has no LAN, so people actually made private servers. SC2 will be far less complex, so no doubt there will be alternate battle.net servers with no cd key checks.
- wisedude, on 07/01/2009, -39/+103Sign this petition if you don't believe this ***** response
http://www.petitiononline.com/LANSC2/petition.html - VinnieDaMac, on 07/01/2009, -1/+63The question might be, "What has Activision done to Blizzard?"
- Alias1431, on 07/01/2009, -5/+66You must be new to the internet.
- killerbob2323, on 07/01/2009, -3/+64"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."
Does this mean Diablo 3 will not have LAN also?!!?!?!
***** YOU BLIZZARD! I have been looking forward to Diablo 3 since it was announced, not for battle.net but to play over LAN with my brother and cousin just like we did with diablo 2!
looks like I won't be buying StarCraft 2 OR Diablo 3. - Dugular, on 07/01/2009, -1/+58Reason 8: Encourage players to use Battle.net.... wait.. did we say encourage? we meant to say FORCE
- Crewbie4life, on 07/01/2009, -2/+54LAN parties have always seemed to me to be great ways for Blizzard to increase sales not lower them. Most LAN parties I've been to this is how it worked: A copy of Starcraft would be distributed to the whole group with the same CD key. Then everyone could play on LAN together. Most of the people would then purchase the game later so they could play on Battle.net. It this is how most of my friends got into the game. And they all purchased the game after they had played it at a LAN party. So Increased sales is not a reason to remove LAN from the game
- PsychoBrat, on 07/01/2009, -0/+51"We need to prevent piracy" is the new "think of the children".
- HeavyWave, on 07/01/2009, -0/+48They can't see that with their heads being shoved up their own asses.
- w3stwing, on 07/01/2009, -1/+49So this game is not only being split into three different titles, but now there is no LAN play? What did we do to upset Blizzard | Activision?
- unusualbob, on 07/01/2009, -2/+48Reason 6: They can require subscription fees for Battle.net and suck the life out of everyone who wants to play online.
- icndvl, on 07/01/2009, -3/+48Everything Activision touches turns to *****.
- KungFuMoses, on 07/01/2009, -2/+43Well, looks like I have a better reason to keep playing the original Starcraft. Thanks guys, you just saved me from spending $50 that can now go towards beer and pizza!
- taxman, on 07/01/2009, -0/+40They are just screwing with S.korea
- ChiaGod, on 07/01/2009, -0/+39It is exactly that, read:
"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."
"... 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."
as:
To "safeguard against piracy" we will "require players to be connected to the service (Battlenet)".
Ergo, DRM. - phpirate, on 07/01/2009, -1/+40That's ***** stupid. If your battle.net 2.0 is so great, people will automatically use it whenever its possible instead of LAN. Battle.net was good in SC1, but the lan option was still there and used for when battle.net play didn't make sense.
Evidently you're insecure about about your battle.net 2.0, because it probably sucks in some way, like having a subscription fee. Piracy argument is *****, Starcraft hit NDP top 10 recently and its a decade ***** old game.
If you want to be dicks thats fine. You're not getting my money, and pirates will just play it on the inevitable emulated battle.net servers. - Rhendal, on 07/01/2009, -0/+38Yeah I'll pass on in-game ads like that. ***** that noise.
- kaffein, on 07/01/2009, -6/+43Just make it so the users must login to battle.net to play (local), but allow players utilize their local networks after the handshake...
Yes this still eliminates the ability to play w/o an internet connection, but hey it's how Company of Heroes does it. - Mike17102, on 07/01/2009, -0/+36Couldnt agree more.
SC2 may or may not be a great game, but this company sure as ***** isnt the same Blizzard that brought us the first one, the Diablo games, Warcraft 1-3, and got WoW started. I have slowly but surly watched them change over the years.
They had a rather large ship jumping shortly after WoW launched, where much of the talent that made these games great left the company. I dont know why they left, but its clear Blizzard hasnt been the same since. After that is when all the "rep grind" type stuff got added to WoW too.
The old Blizzard cared about making great games, knowing that if they made all their games awesome (even if they had to delay them to make them awesome) that profit would follow. The new Blizzard seems to care about profit first and foremost. The days that I will assume a game is awesome just because Blizzard's name is on it are long past. - DankJemo, on 07/01/2009, -0/+35Thank you Ollie, for that colorful commentary about Blizzards heartless decision.
Now we go to Tricia Takanawa to see why Rock Star games decided to make Max Payne old... - erhanaltay, on 07/01/2009, -7/+41Blizzard is making a mistake here. This is a PR disaster and it won't accomplish a thing. Most pro Starcraft gamers even today use emulated battle.net servers which won't be prevented by SC2s lack of LAN support. This is like throwing a napkin on the ground in hopes of slowing down a raging bull, little to no effect.
If Blizzard wants to monetize SC2 better they could sell special items on B.Net. So for example someone could pay $5 to have their marines have santa hats for 30 days. Another way is to sell advertisements in-game so for example at the center of the map there would be a giant coca cola logo on the floor. - contact, on 07/01/2009, -5/+38This is almost as annoying has having to connect to Steam to play Portals.
- Aliwalla, on 07/01/2009, -1/+34This is what happens when your company gets taken over by the marketing department. I'm slowly watching it happen to mine and it's truly sad.
- suldar, on 07/01/2009, -2/+35I am getting really sick of these hoops I have to jump through to play games that I am actually paying for. I've been forced to register with the company and sometimes other companies, install additional software, disable my virtual CD drives, constantly switch CD's when I switch games, deal with bugs related to badly implemented DRM, incorrect or missing serial numbers, registration issues, etc. At least give me the option of not being forced to use your network to play a game that I paid for with some friends. Some of the best times I ever had playing computer games were through a LAN connection.
- Deepmist, on 07/01/2009, -14/+46I think it's stupid but bandwidth cap is a lame excuse. You probably couldn't play enough Starcraft in a month to match the bandwidth it takes to watch a few youtube videos.
- zeigual, on 07/01/2009, -3/+34dealbreaker. end of story.
- Jektal, on 07/01/2009, -0/+30And that was the absolute hands-down best "shareware" implementation I have ever seen.
The Spawn versions could only join a LAN game that the was hosted by their originator, and it got people to play the game for free. Casual LAN? Great, here's this cool game, let's play it and have a blast. Had fun? Want to host your own LAN, play single-player, or play online? Go out and buy a copy.
Makes me sad to see Blizzard taking a complete 180 on this. - Frost9999, on 07/01/2009, -0/+29I remember the golden age of PC gaming. When companies would include every possible way to play the game with your friends. No network card? No problem, just buy a null-modem cable for local play. I even remember using a paralell port cable for Doom (not sure if that was some kind of hack... long time ago now). Then there was local network support using IPX, and dial-up modem support so I could connect via phone lines and play deathmatch with friends across town.
Now these same companies are going the opposite direction to the one that got them rich in the first place. Fewer features, restrictive multiplayer options, copy protection, etc. -
Show 51 - 100 of 578 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is