LAN, This

[hyde]

Thing is, Blizzard promised this kind of technology (look here), but apparently did not deliver. The question that naturally arises is, what makes BattleNet 2.0 better than the original?

P.S. And besides, region lock in many ways negates the very nature and spirit of the internet and multiplayer games in themselves. The whole point of the web is that you can easily connect and communicate with everyone around the globe (nevermind what countries like China or Iran try to do to prevent this). Compartmentalizing regions, even for a game, is a small but pretty worrying step towards an internet that is censored, controlled, divided and where economical differences between users matter as much as in the real world. So opposing it is a question of principle as much as gaming convenience. Practically all games that were released in the last two decads and had multiplayer, you could play with anyone around the globe, StarCraft 2 shouldn't be different.

Agreed. Battle.net 2.0 looked great at first until all this Gestapo police state stuff arised. I don't see the point in region locking. If they truly want the "best online experience" I have a simple solution.
Have the ability to change your license/region once every x months and/or be forced to have your entire battle.net account wiped on the old realm.
I see it the only compromise at this point, because Traditional LAN, Gateways, and Blizzard listening to fans is pretty much gone.

They've instead placed puppets that ask us if we really want chat rooms.
Pretty insulting if you ask me.

[KadajSouba]

Battle.net 2.0 looked great at first until all this Gestapo police state stuff arised.

Somehow that put a smile on my face... Weird...

[GnaReffotsirk]

That looks very creepy.