"It's called LAN!"

[Noise]

The only thing that can possibly redeem them would be if you were required to start the game over battle net but it somehow detected that you are on a LAN together and then used that connection for game, if you understand what I'm saying.

[Xyvik]

The only thing that can possibly redeem them would be if you were required to start the game over battle net but it somehow detected that you are on a LAN together and then used that connection for game, if you understand what I'm saying.

If they pulled that off, I would forgive them. Such a route is not actually impossible, shifting server connections and all that. It would be tricky to work, but hey, if that's what the delay is for...

If they really -can- show something worthwhile, I can forgive them. But so far nothing they have shown can even compare with Steam, and Steam gives me LAN. It's like we're taking four steps backwards, when Bnet 2 is supposed to be the "next best thing."

C'mon Blizzard, dazzle us with something awesome!

[Pandonetho]

The only thing that can possibly redeem them would be if you were required to start the game over battle net but it somehow detected that you are on a LAN together and then used that connection for game, if you understand what I'm saying.

This is already how b.net for WC3 works... unless I'm mistaken with something else.

[Noise]

This is already how b.net for WC3 works... unless I'm mistaken with something else.

If this is true, then I have no problem with it.

[Nicol Bolas]

When a company blatantly decides to remove one of the key cornerstones of PC gaming as we know it, and they proceed to give insulting and idiotic reasons as to why, then I say we have a RIGHT to "qqing" about no LAN.

When LAN becomes a "key cornerstone of PC gaming as we know it," let me know.

But so far nothing they have shown can even compare with Steam, and Steam gives me LAN.

Steam isn't a game; it doesn't support LAN. Indeed, unless you set your Steam games up beforehand to be used offline, you can't even play them without the Internet. This is worse than StarCraft 2's lack of LAN; it won't stop you from playing singleplayer just because your Internet went out.

[Kalash]

When LAN becomes a "key cornerstone of PC gaming as we know it," let me know.

Dreamhack, SC Pro Games, CS Pro Games, every tournament?

[Xyvik]

When LAN becomes a "key cornerstone of PC gaming as we know it," let me know.

Uhm, have you been PLAYING PC games for the last, oh ten years? Cuz I have. RTS games since Age of Empires, heck, since Command & Conquer, had rudimentary LAN ability. I know because I was back there playing them. You know, before this thing called the 'internet' was all high and mighty. So far you're the ONLY person I've met, in 12+ years of gaming, who has once mentioned LAN not being an integral part of the PC gaming scene. So how about you let me know when LAN became unimportant. I never got the memo.

Steam isn't a game; it doesn't support LAN. Indeed, unless you set your Steam games up beforehand to be used offline, you can't even play them without the Internet. This is worse than StarCraft 2's lack of LAN; it won't stop you from playing singleplayer just because your Internet went out.

When was the last time you used Steam? Since about midway through last year (or even before that, I can't remember) there was an update where games are automatically setup to be used offline. Piece of cake. Once they're downloaded, you can go offline with them. I do it all the time.

Also, Bnet 2 isn't a game either, so I really don't understand your reasoning. Bnet 2 does not support LAN play. The games designed to use Bnet 2, such as D3 and SC2, do not support LAN play.

Just about every single game released on Steam, certainly the big-ticket Valve games, support LAN. Why? Because Steam supports LAN play.

So tell me again how Bnet 2 is ahead of Steam?

[ArcherofAiur]

It cannot be stressed enough how absolutly abismal some college firewalls are.

[Pandonetho]

Alright folks, first of all, using your own experience with LAN as some sort of justification in your argument is pure... bullshit.

I've never given a damn about LAN and neither have any of my friends. Oh yes, let me use that as a justification as to why LAN doesn't matter. What, are you going to tell me I'm a deprived child who doesn't know anything about PC gaming next?

Second of all, Blizzard has already said they plan on including something to replace LAN, so quit crying about it until you actually see what they have for us.

Third, IIRC b.net for WC3 already detects when you're in the same network and enables LAN latency.

Lastly, I can't even begin to think how stupid some people can get through their anger. Blizzard, the company which is pushing for e-sports more than any gaming company I know, is going to sacrifice LAN so that gaming tournaments are not possible with the lag? Are you people smoking something or what is it?

Oh wait, one more thing, no matter what anyone says, Blizzard probably couldn't care less about the people who have issues with internet.

They said themselves they had more players on b.net than they do playing WoW. Yes, so whatever miniscule number of people who are crying about LAN plan to boycott the game, it won't make a difference. A company's number one priority is profit, and if Blizzard thinks this will bring them profit, there's no persauding them.

[Kalash]

Well, actually i believe the No Lan decision its to stop tournaments Lan tournaments like koreans leagues and be able to control everything inside the game, so they can sell Promatches broadcast and earn proffits from everything, like sponsors and stuff...
If that happens i dont know if thats good or bad, i guess time will tell.

using your own experience with LAN as some sort of justification in your argument is pure... bullshit.
I've never given a damn about LAN and neither have any of my friends.

Had to