Do people actually play games at LANs where there is no connection to the internet?
As noted above, have you tried playing online at a LAN party with over 30 people hooked up to the same internet.
It sucks.
I'm pretty sure all Battle.net would require of you is authentication and matchmaking. Once you're in the game it's not going to route all traffic from one LAN computer, around the internet, and to another LAN computer.
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.[...]We’re looking forward to sharing more details about Battle.net and online functionality for StarCraft II in the near future
They're really describing it as an absence of LAN, not LAN-with-online-authentification
I agree that the quote sounds like that. However all game packets are not going to be routed through Blizzard's servers for logistical reasons. If all you're left with is the ability to log into Battle.net, join a passworded game with your LAN buddies, and have the game send packets within your LAN, it's functionally equivalent to a LAN game, minus multiplayer spawns.
I'm going to assume it means you just play it on b.net, which means things are routed. Do you know how things are handled now when you play b.net?
Like if I create a game and someone joins, does that link our computers instead of going through the b.net servers? (I assume yes) So if that's the case, the Blizzard server still acts as a router to point the packets to the correct location.
But again this is all assumptions based on their old b.net technology.
Yeah I guess there's two uses of the word 'router'. One is the technical side of matchmaking, where Battle.net says to each client "The other players' IPs are x.x.x.x, etc., now go send data to each-other" (which I believe is how it works currently, and how I think it would work with SC2). The other is the act of sending each packet to Battle.net, which then sends it to its correct destination, like a physical router. I don't think the latter will be the case.
I hope not. But the thing is, when b.net was having issues... Then the lag in some SC games was atrocious. So that made me think it was the latter.
I think, but don't quote me on this, that it will run in the latter mode if the clients are unable to directly connect with each other (NAT/firewalling getting in the way) but defaults to "Player 1 is x.x.x.x, Player 2 is y.y.y.y, connect to each other kthxbai"
PeregrineFalcon on
Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
IIRC, SC1 uses B.Net for auth and matchmaking, but the actual players exchange game data peer to peer.
On the flip side, D2 has had the Blizzard-hosted Realm games for years to help prevent cheating.
They could very well be planning to run servers to host SC2 games in this same manner. I mean, sure it'll cost $Texas, but they already make $Northamerica monthly anyway, so I think they can afford it. :P
Wish Blizzard would think outside the box and try a new genre and/or a new IP for once.
They actually are making a new IP. It's going to be an MMO, we don't know what type of MMO it's going to be, but presumably it's not going to compete with WoW so you know it won't be a clone at least.
Wish Blizzard would think outside the box and try a new genre and/or a new IP for once.
They actually are making a new IP. It's going to be an MMO, we don't know what type of MMO it's going to be, but presumably it's not going to compete with WoW so you know it won't be a clone at least.
You people are trying to speculate on all this b.net crap, and the point you all are missing is that half the LAN parties out there don't have internet.
You people are trying to speculate on all this b.net crap, and the point you all are missing is that half the LAN parties out there don't have internet.
I'm not missing it in the slightest. I'm not sure anyone is, actually.
You people are trying to speculate on all this b.net crap, and the point you all are missing is that half the LAN parties out there don't have internet.
Oh yeah I know. I was just worried about the one I frequent. It has internet, but it's incredibly slow. So if all it has to do is authenticate and then never actually use the 'net, then I'll be fine.
Otherwise we'll find another strategy game to play and enjoy.
You people are trying to speculate on all this b.net crap, and the point you all are missing is that half the LAN parties out there don't have internet.
Oh yeah I know. I was just worried about the one I frequent. It has internet, but it's incredibly slow. So if all it has to do is authenticate and then never actually use the 'net, then I'll be fine.
Otherwise we'll find another strategy game to play and enjoy.
What kind of ass-backwards LAN parties are you going to without a T3 line into every machine lol get with the times hurf durf.
Also, just noticed your title/location. Congrats.
PeregrineFalcon on
Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
You people are trying to speculate on all this b.net crap, and the point you all are missing is that half the LAN parties out there don't have internet.
Oh yeah I know. I was just worried about the one I frequent. It has internet, but it's incredibly slow. So if all it has to do is authenticate and then never actually use the 'net, then I'll be fine.
Otherwise we'll find another strategy game to play and enjoy.
What kind of ass-backwards LAN parties are you going to without a T3 line into every machine lol get with the times hurf durf.
You people are trying to speculate on all this b.net crap, and the point you all are missing is that half the LAN parties out there don't have internet.
I'm not missing it in the slightest. I'm not sure anyone is, actually.
A lot of people are, like Henroid. But his posts are just special like that.
But the point is that there's no LAN, Blizzard is going to have some other, new, exciting thing to make up for it, and there's really no point in arguing about it.
You people are trying to speculate on all this b.net crap, and the point you all are missing is that half the LAN parties out there don't have internet.
I'm not missing it in the slightest. I'm not sure anyone is, actually.
A lot of people are, like Henroid. But his posts are just special like that.
But the point is that there's no LAN, Blizzard is going to have some other, new, exciting thing to make up for it, and there's really no point in arguing about it.
See, this part? I don't buy this. What other "new, exciting" thing could possibly replace the ability to connect two PCs together and play a game between them? I've got a healthy imagination, but I'm at a loss to conceive of this wondrous thing that others seem capable of.
So help me out. What's going to replace LAN? Keep in mind that Blizzard has said nothing about a LAN replacement, just a removal.
You people are trying to speculate on all this b.net crap, and the point you all are missing is that half the LAN parties out there don't have internet.
I'm not missing it in the slightest. I'm not sure anyone is, actually.
A lot of people are, like Henroid. But his posts are just special like that.
But the point is that there's no LAN, Blizzard is going to have some other, new, exciting thing to make up for it, and there's really no point in arguing about it.
See, this part? I don't buy this. What other "new, exciting" thing could possibly replace the ability to connect two PCs together and play a game between them? I've got a healthy imagination, but I'm at a loss to conceive of this wondrous thing that others seem capable of.
So help me out. What's going to replace LAN? Keep in mind that Blizzard has said nothing about a LAN replacement, just a removal.
As was speculated on pages 2 and 3 of this thread, it is probably some akin to Steam's offline mode, except for b.net 2.0
Oh, I hate micro so I'm very happy that there is an RTS where micro involves setting up 20 factories and building waves of heavy assault bots to storm an enemy base.
You know, in addition to the obvious "omg piracy" angle here, I think there's a second, perhaps nearly as important factor in Blizzard's B.net-only decision: Stat tracking and player data persistence.
In the post-WoW era, everything you do in a multiplayer game counts. "/played" counts everything, LAN games and probably even single-player. Your resource efficiency, your k/d ratio, everything is tracked and you can look at the graphs to chart your improvement. Achievements, ranks -- you're going to be accruing these things wherever you're playing, too, so it makes sense to require a Battle.net connection for that.
I'm pretty sure that everyone suggesting LAN support will simply be B.net-mediated is correct. Most likely, LAN gaming will simply become an invisible optimization when the server detects multiple players behind the same NAT IP.
Supreme Commander is a better LAN game anyways. Can't carpet nuke that guy quite so effectively nor can you black out his base with strategic bombers.
3 Terran bases with nukes ready. A swarm of medics + ghosts (stealthed), all setup to nuke a zerg base... That is some amazing shit right there!
You haven't RTS'd until you've sent in the troops right after a nuclear strike
Hell by most late-game base assaults you need a nuke for your ground troops to get through the defensive lines
What's funny is when they've got an anti-missile system up, but you know it's got only 5 shots before they need to regenerate. So you just build multiple strategic launchers and spam it with incoming fire, seeing each missile getting shot down in turn until they've run out.
And then, sunlight. You know it's special when it's visible from orbit.
I'm looking forward to SupCom 2, looks like they're really streamlining the game and making it more immediate, whilst keeping the focus on the large scale combat.
People still care about LAN play? People who aren't pirates bummed that they won't be able to Hamachi themselves into some multiplayer? Wow. I honestly thought LAN parties were basically extinct now that broadband and voip are widely available. I play PC games online pretty heavily and I haven't played anything over a LAN, virtual or not, since AvP2.
And I am the world, therefore nobody plays games over LAN anymore I guess. Q.E.D.
My friends and I love to get together and have a LAN. Two of them live outside of town; two have wireless broadband which is terrible for gaming, and the other has one of the worst phone lines possible, making a mockery of his 3mb connection (it frequently disconnects and his download speeds typically only reach around 80k). Eircom, Ireland's national telecommunications company that has a massive grip on the market, says they can do nothing about it, which is bullshit. Either way, that means three of the six that are a part of the lan cannot join Skype and then a game.
Only one or two of us are technically competent (my flat-mate and I), having worked in tech support before, and every time there's a lan there are games that need installing, patches, mods, they can't see the network game because stupid Windows Firewall is being a douche, the game won't install/launch/has a garbled screen/etc... fixing all of that is difficult enough at a lan where you have limited time, but doing that over an Internet connection would be impossible.
And besides, there is nothing better than listening to and seeing their howls of frustration as they get killed in whatever game. GameCon, a lan gaming event is held in Ireland twice a year. It holds over two hundred pc and console users and in between the tournaments, people are playing all sorts of games (like Soldat, for example) and having a laugh. And it isn't even the only lan event in the country, as far as I'm aware there are two other events held in different areas of the country that are just as popular. At GameCon, no matter what 'net connection they get, it's always a joke because too many people are connected. Having to log into that asshole of a service, Steam, just to play a simple lan game with friends, on a connection slower than dial-up is an exercise in patience like you wouldn't believe.
So take our last lan for example, this past weekend. Our 7mb broadband connection was extremely slow and didn't improve until I turned off the router yesterday for an hour. It was simply to the point of overloading, having to deal with four computers connected via ethernet, two desktops via wi-fi, and the two laptops that are always connected via wi-fi, also. Logging into Steam was a joke. So, we didn't. We stayed with games that had a good, properly coded lan component, like CoD4, World at War, Battlefield 1942 with Pirates mod, Halo, Supreme Commander, Warcraft III with and without mods... and we had a blast.
We were all looking forward to adding Starcraft II to our list of games we play over the lan, but screw Blizzard if we have to go anywhere near the Internet in order to do it. The game isn't worth the hassle it would cause trying to get it to run. It's my flat-mate I feel sorry for, we were all looking forward to the game, but he's the big fan. If someone manages to hack lan capability into the game, then we will go with that option, enjoy ourselves and stick a big metaphorical (and not so metaphorical) finger in Blizzard's direction.
Rohan on
...and I thought of how all those people died, and what a good death that is. That nobody can blame you for it, because everyone else died along with you, and it is the fault of none, save those who did the killing.
Either way Blizzard is going to lose out on potential sales by cutting LAN. Look at the feedback their getting, not just on this forum, but practically all gaming forums.
Look at how many people throw fits regarding WoW, declarations of quitting and such. It hasn't hurt their business much.
yeah, junkies will complain, but they'll pay any price for their fix
With the difference being, that for many the ability to LAN is the actual fix.
I doubt they'll lose enough sales to actually notice, though.
blizzard is not stupid, and it would be incredibly stupid to not allow play over a LAN
what it most likely will be is authentication over bnet & gameplay over the lan
Either way Blizzard is going to lose out on potential sales by cutting LAN. Look at the feedback their getting, not just on this forum, but practically all gaming forums.
Look at how many people throw fits regarding WoW, declarations of quitting and such. It hasn't hurt their business much.
yeah, junkies will complain, but they'll pay any price for their fix
With the difference being, that for many the ability to LAN is the actual fix.
I doubt they'll lose enough sales to actually notice, though.
blizzard is not stupid, and it would be incredibly stupid to not allow play over a LAN
what it most likely will be is authentication over bnet & gameplay over the lan
And if you have no internet...?
Actually let me finish that for you. If you have no internet, you have no gameplay over LAN.
Houn on
0
AxenMy avatar is Excalibur.Yes, the sword.Registered Userregular
Either way Blizzard is going to lose out on potential sales by cutting LAN. Look at the feedback their getting, not just on this forum, but practically all gaming forums.
Look at how many people throw fits regarding WoW, declarations of quitting and such. It hasn't hurt their business much.
yeah, junkies will complain, but they'll pay any price for their fix
With the difference being, that for many the ability to LAN is the actual fix.
I doubt they'll lose enough sales to actually notice, though.
blizzard is not stupid, and it would be incredibly stupid to not allow play over a LAN
what it most likely will be is authentication over bnet & gameplay over the lan
And if you have no internet...?
Actually let me finish that for you. If you have no internet, you have no gameplay over LAN.
I am glad someone else understands this.
Axen on
A Capellan's favorite sheath for any blade is your back.
Either way Blizzard is going to lose out on potential sales by cutting LAN. Look at the feedback their getting, not just on this forum, but practically all gaming forums.
Look at how many people throw fits regarding WoW, declarations of quitting and such. It hasn't hurt their business much.
yeah, junkies will complain, but they'll pay any price for their fix
With the difference being, that for many the ability to LAN is the actual fix.
I doubt they'll lose enough sales to actually notice, though.
blizzard is not stupid, and it would be incredibly stupid to not allow play over a LAN
what it most likely will be is authentication over bnet & gameplay over the lan
And if you have no internet...?
Actually let me finish that for you. If you have no internet, you have no gameplay over LAN.
I am glad someone else understands this.
Again, speculation at this point, but most likely you'll need to authenticate over b.net initially, then from there you can use it in an offline type mode to play whenever you don't have internet
You really, really want Blizzard to be bad at making games don't you?
Either way Blizzard is going to lose out on potential sales by cutting LAN. Look at the feedback their getting, not just on this forum, but practically all gaming forums.
Look at how many people throw fits regarding WoW, declarations of quitting and such. It hasn't hurt their business much.
yeah, junkies will complain, but they'll pay any price for their fix
With the difference being, that for many the ability to LAN is the actual fix.
I doubt they'll lose enough sales to actually notice, though.
blizzard is not stupid, and it would be incredibly stupid to not allow play over a LAN
what it most likely will be is authentication over bnet & gameplay over the lan
And if you have no internet...?
Actually let me finish that for you. If you have no internet, you have no gameplay over LAN.
I am glad someone else understands this.
Again, speculation at this point, but most likely you'll need to authenticate over b.net initially, then from there you can use it in an offline type mode to play whenever you don't have internet
You really, really want Blizzard to be bad at making games don't you?
So even if you authenticate and can play offline, that still means multiplayer is OUT unless you go online for it.
Machismo on
0
AxenMy avatar is Excalibur.Yes, the sword.Registered Userregular
Either way Blizzard is going to lose out on potential sales by cutting LAN. Look at the feedback their getting, not just on this forum, but practically all gaming forums.
Look at how many people throw fits regarding WoW, declarations of quitting and such. It hasn't hurt their business much.
yeah, junkies will complain, but they'll pay any price for their fix
With the difference being, that for many the ability to LAN is the actual fix.
I doubt they'll lose enough sales to actually notice, though.
blizzard is not stupid, and it would be incredibly stupid to not allow play over a LAN
what it most likely will be is authentication over bnet & gameplay over the lan
And if you have no internet...?
Actually let me finish that for you. If you have no internet, you have no gameplay over LAN.
I am glad someone else understands this.
Again, speculation at this point, but most likely you'll need to authenticate over b.net initially, then from there you can use it in an offline type mode to play whenever you don't have internet
You really, really want Blizzard to be bad at making games don't you?
But what you suggest implies LAN support, which they have said they will not do.
Axen on
A Capellan's favorite sheath for any blade is your back.
Either way Blizzard is going to lose out on potential sales by cutting LAN. Look at the feedback their getting, not just on this forum, but practically all gaming forums.
Look at how many people throw fits regarding WoW, declarations of quitting and such. It hasn't hurt their business much.
yeah, junkies will complain, but they'll pay any price for their fix
With the difference being, that for many the ability to LAN is the actual fix.
I doubt they'll lose enough sales to actually notice, though.
blizzard is not stupid, and it would be incredibly stupid to not allow play over a LAN
what it most likely will be is authentication over bnet & gameplay over the lan
And if you have no internet...?
Actually let me finish that for you. If you have no internet, you have no gameplay over LAN.
either there will be some sort of activation, or.. it sucks to be you
I'm using the internet since 1997 and can't remember a single time I had an outage when I wanted to do somethin important. Sure, you could say "but what if I'm on a trip lolo"
Well, use cell phone internet over bluetooth!
Ok, that was more of a joke, but where would you conceivably have a lan set up, without any access to the internet being possible?
Military installation?
Posts
But, uh, when you look at this:
They're really describing it as an absence of LAN, not LAN-with-online-authentification
Like if I create a game and someone joins, does that link our computers instead of going through the b.net servers? (I assume yes) So if that's the case, the Blizzard server still acts as a router to point the packets to the correct location.
But again this is all assumptions based on their old b.net technology.
I think, but don't quote me on this, that it will run in the latter mode if the clients are unable to directly connect with each other (NAT/firewalling getting in the way) but defaults to "Player 1 is x.x.x.x, Player 2 is y.y.y.y, connect to each other kthxbai"
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
On the flip side, D2 has had the Blizzard-hosted Realm games for years to help prevent cheating.
They could very well be planning to run servers to host SC2 games in this same manner. I mean, sure it'll cost $Texas, but they already make $Northamerica monthly anyway, so I think they can afford it. :P
They actually are making a new IP. It's going to be an MMO, we don't know what type of MMO it's going to be, but presumably it's not going to compete with WoW so you know it won't be a clone at least.
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
Wish it were a puzzle or adventure game.
Hell I'll take a FPS. :P
I'm not missing it in the slightest. I'm not sure anyone is, actually.
Oh yeah I know. I was just worried about the one I frequent. It has internet, but it's incredibly slow. So if all it has to do is authenticate and then never actually use the 'net, then I'll be fine.
Otherwise we'll find another strategy game to play and enjoy.
What kind of ass-backwards LAN parties are you going to without a T3 line into every machine lol get with the times hurf durf.
Also, just noticed your title/location. Congrats.
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
Haha thanks
And I'm in Ohio. Best we got is Cable interwebs.
But the point is that there's no LAN, Blizzard is going to have some other, new, exciting thing to make up for it, and there's really no point in arguing about it.
See, this part? I don't buy this. What other "new, exciting" thing could possibly replace the ability to connect two PCs together and play a game between them? I've got a healthy imagination, but I'm at a loss to conceive of this wondrous thing that others seem capable of.
So help me out. What's going to replace LAN? Keep in mind that Blizzard has said nothing about a LAN replacement, just a removal.
Supreme Commander is a better LAN game anyways. Can't carpet nuke that guy quite so effectively nor can you black out his base with strategic bombers.
3 Terran bases with nukes ready. A swarm of medics + ghosts (stealthed), all setup to nuke a zerg base... That is some amazing shit right there!
I'm surprised that someone else here likes Supreme Commander as well.
Stay classy Robman. :^:
EDIT: @ urahonky:
We're talking something a few orders of power bigger than that here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COUN_EzmVNA
As was speculated on pages 2 and 3 of this thread, it is probably some akin to Steam's offline mode, except for b.net 2.0
You haven't RTS'd until you've sent in the troops right after a nuclear strike
Hell by most late-game base assaults you need a nuke for your ground troops to get through the defensive lines
In the post-WoW era, everything you do in a multiplayer game counts. "/played" counts everything, LAN games and probably even single-player. Your resource efficiency, your k/d ratio, everything is tracked and you can look at the graphs to chart your improvement. Achievements, ranks -- you're going to be accruing these things wherever you're playing, too, so it makes sense to require a Battle.net connection for that.
I'm pretty sure that everyone suggesting LAN support will simply be B.net-mediated is correct. Most likely, LAN gaming will simply become an invisible optimization when the server detects multiple players behind the same NAT IP.
PSN:RevDrGalactus/NN:RevDrGalactus/Steam
The last time they made a game in a new genre it was an MMO. The time before that it ended up getting cancelled.
What's funny is when they've got an anti-missile system up, but you know it's got only 5 shots before they need to regenerate. So you just build multiple strategic launchers and spam it with incoming fire, seeing each missile getting shot down in turn until they've run out.
And then, sunlight. You know it's special when it's visible from orbit.
I'm looking forward to SupCom 2, looks like they're really streamlining the game and making it more immediate, whilst keeping the focus on the large scale combat.
Anyway /derail.
My friends and I love to get together and have a LAN. Two of them live outside of town; two have wireless broadband which is terrible for gaming, and the other has one of the worst phone lines possible, making a mockery of his 3mb connection (it frequently disconnects and his download speeds typically only reach around 80k). Eircom, Ireland's national telecommunications company that has a massive grip on the market, says they can do nothing about it, which is bullshit. Either way, that means three of the six that are a part of the lan cannot join Skype and then a game.
Only one or two of us are technically competent (my flat-mate and I), having worked in tech support before, and every time there's a lan there are games that need installing, patches, mods, they can't see the network game because stupid Windows Firewall is being a douche, the game won't install/launch/has a garbled screen/etc... fixing all of that is difficult enough at a lan where you have limited time, but doing that over an Internet connection would be impossible.
And besides, there is nothing better than listening to and seeing their howls of frustration as they get killed in whatever game. GameCon, a lan gaming event is held in Ireland twice a year. It holds over two hundred pc and console users and in between the tournaments, people are playing all sorts of games (like Soldat, for example) and having a laugh. And it isn't even the only lan event in the country, as far as I'm aware there are two other events held in different areas of the country that are just as popular. At GameCon, no matter what 'net connection they get, it's always a joke because too many people are connected. Having to log into that asshole of a service, Steam, just to play a simple lan game with friends, on a connection slower than dial-up is an exercise in patience like you wouldn't believe.
So take our last lan for example, this past weekend. Our 7mb broadband connection was extremely slow and didn't improve until I turned off the router yesterday for an hour. It was simply to the point of overloading, having to deal with four computers connected via ethernet, two desktops via wi-fi, and the two laptops that are always connected via wi-fi, also. Logging into Steam was a joke. So, we didn't. We stayed with games that had a good, properly coded lan component, like CoD4, World at War, Battlefield 1942 with Pirates mod, Halo, Supreme Commander, Warcraft III with and without mods... and we had a blast.
We were all looking forward to adding Starcraft II to our list of games we play over the lan, but screw Blizzard if we have to go anywhere near the Internet in order to do it. The game isn't worth the hassle it would cause trying to get it to run. It's my flat-mate I feel sorry for, we were all looking forward to the game, but he's the big fan. If someone manages to hack lan capability into the game, then we will go with that option, enjoy ourselves and stick a big metaphorical (and not so metaphorical) finger in Blizzard's direction.
Nothing's forgotten, nothing is ever forgotten
blizzard is not stupid, and it would be incredibly stupid to not allow play over a LAN
what it most likely will be is authentication over bnet & gameplay over the lan
I'm craving for WoW again.. Just one fun-raid, no strings attached! I can play it casually?
hahaha
hahah
And if you have no internet...?
Actually let me finish that for you. If you have no internet, you have no gameplay over LAN.
I am glad someone else understands this.
Again, speculation at this point, but most likely you'll need to authenticate over b.net initially, then from there you can use it in an offline type mode to play whenever you don't have internet
You really, really want Blizzard to be bad at making games don't you?
So even if you authenticate and can play offline, that still means multiplayer is OUT unless you go online for it.
But what you suggest implies LAN support, which they have said they will not do.
I'm using the internet since 1997 and can't remember a single time I had an outage when I wanted to do somethin important. Sure, you could say "but what if I'm on a trip lolo"
Well, use cell phone internet over bluetooth!
Ok, that was more of a joke, but where would you conceivably have a lan set up, without any access to the internet being possible?
Military installation?