Blizzard Explains StarCraft II's Lack Of LAN Support

18 Comments Posted June 30, 2009 - By Brian Leahy

Brian Leahy loves Starcraft II (2)

When StarCraft II (Hands-On Preview) launches, it will not support LAN play. How can this be?! Joystiq got the reasoning from Blizzard PR man Bob Colayco:

"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."

I'm going to go ahead and emphasize the part of the quote where Colayco says part of the reason is to "safeguard against piracy." If you look at the current state of StarCraft multiplayer, a lot of players use pirated copies to play over services like Hamachi or on emulated B.net servers running custom ladders like iCCup. Blizzard would obviously prefer for the community to be in the same place.

What does a lack of LAN support mean for the average user, though?

Probably not that much. I'm guessing that the solution in place will merely require that gamers validate their copy with Battle.net before they can play any type of multiplayer. After that, B.net will likely be used to setup the games, but gamers on a LAN should enjoy LAN latency after that point.

This is similar to how Relic runs Company of Heroes and Dawn of War II, with the former requiring validation to Relic's own multiplayer service and the latter authenticating with Steam (and then Games for Windows Live if you're playing online).

The biggest impact could hit LAN parties or tournaments. Unless Blizzard has a specific solution for sanctioned events, the organizers will have to maintain an Internet connection to validate all of the players.

What do you think about the lack of LAN support?

Source

Tags: Apple, PC Gaming, Videogames

Comments

Oldest First

Displaying 1–18 of 18

btherrien

Back in the day it was good times hooking up with buddies and do LAN battles on Starcraft all day.
Now I'm not so concerned about it going, im more worried about Blizzard saying, "join our NEW battle.net! now give us $20 a month!" That would suck more then no LAN.

Posted: June 30, 2009 10:20 AM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
Brian Leahy

Blizzard has said that B.net 2.0 will remain free.

Posted: June 30, 2009 10:30 AM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
Giga

i could see it going eather way for good or bad. I under stand why they are doing it but then again you dont all ways want to play on an open system if you just want a few friends to hook up and play

Posted: June 30, 2009 10:31 AM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
Luna_Saisho

I don't see how it really changes everything. The LAN party is about the socializing and having your allies/enemies in the same room to talk smack with ... You can still do that, but you're just connecting through Battlenet.

I knew this kind of thing would happen, as the only real way to protect their software would be to validate it online.

Posted: June 30, 2009 10:43 AM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
BertSaxby

Lame.

Posted: June 30, 2009 11:52 AM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
BloodKnight86

FIGNUTZ

Posted: June 30, 2009 12:02 PM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
Griffith4100

Absolutely hate this news. I host lan parties in absurd locations (senior centers, church basements, my garage) that have no internet connections. We get like 20 ppl all playing SC at once with each other over Lan, and its amazing fun. Why Blizzard? Why? Most of us who still play SC love the game, but don't consider ourselves "hardcore" gamers, who would just rather play over lan with our friends in the same room. After talking to my friends, we seriously doubt the reason to buy a game that is most likely going to be cracked for lan...

Posted: June 30, 2009 12:16 PM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
swede7754

I agree with the comments by btherrien & Giga. Also, if they're gonna push us toward Battle.Net, they should've started that a LOOOOOOONG time ago. How long has the service been up - around 10 years? Plenty of time to start weening off LAN parties.

Posted: June 30, 2009 12:22 PM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
EVAzero

What!?!? I hate this news. We still get together for Starcraft lan nights. I do play over battle.net, but lan parties are so much fun. Pizza, chips, soda, candy. Yeah I could still enjoy those things, but alone would be sad.

Posted: June 30, 2009 1:05 PM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
FuzzyHammer

lame. No surprise tho, Blizzard usually makes poor decisions.

Posted: June 30, 2009 1:52 PM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
Arteska

A few years ago I would have moaned more but you can still create private channels and games, etc. so expecting people to be able to connect to the internet isn't as annoyingly presumptuous as it used to be.

Posted: June 30, 2009 3:05 PM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
Raverenz51

@FuzzyHammer, Blizzard makes GOOD Decisions. Name 1 bad Blizzard game. Starcraft, WC3, WoW, Diablo 2? No, you can't. Because they make quality games with the decisions they want.

Posted: July 1, 2009 6:08 AM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
roscobot

I cant see both sides of the argument. You can't beat a good lan. But then again, I also agree that it isn't presumptuous to ask people to connect to the internet. It's not exactly one of those rare things people only a few people have.

Posted: July 1, 2009 6:58 AM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
travelmaps

clearly people that dont understand this dont actually lan... they like to just sit by themselves at their own house and pretend theyre actually hanging out with their friends via ventrilo. this is why i hate blizzard. self important ea wannabetards.
diablo 3 is now WOW and their rts cant even lan. BUT BLIZZARD IS AWESOME! YAY!

Posted: July 1, 2009 7:47 AM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
dwatsonedu

I can appreciate Blizzard's concern with piracy as I can understand the concern is shared by all developers. The problem is that they are removing the elements from their games that made them great. When I was 14 and had no internet, my cousins and I could still have epic battles. These steps to avoid piracy are narrowing the gamer audience to one with an "always on" internet connection.

Posted: July 1, 2009 7:58 AM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
zealot904

what was the last time blizzard did something right?

Posted: July 1, 2009 8:13 AM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
Apsalus07

Everybody and their mother knows this move was only made to prevent piracy (specifically multiplayer piracy like Hamachi). However, evil always finds a way. The irony is that Blizzard is essentially GIVING UP, saying that there is no way to prevent piracy other than to take out elements of their game from the equation. Think about this: what's next? Will Blizzard stop making single player games altogether because they can easily be pirated? Will Starcraft III be a multiplayer-only game?

Posted: July 1, 2009 9:14 PM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies
maruhan2

Uh OH!!
Now what's going to happen to Korean PC Rooms

Posted: July 2, 2009 4:25 AM | Reply | Report

+1 thumbs up thumbs down

0 Replies