KK_ Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 at 55$ usd per game , for 100k people , its 5.5million . but im sure thats just chump change to blizzard these days Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClayMeow Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 at 55$ usd per game , for 100k people , its 5.5million . but im sure thats just chump change to blizzard these days Chump change or not, you're also making three major assumptions: 1. All 100k signatures are unique real-life people. 2. All 100k signatures actually represent potential buyers. 3. All 100k signatures will not purchase the game if LAN is not added. I'm going to guess that all three of those points fail. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathmineral Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 I don't think any of those points change the fact that they will lose money by doing this, I'm very confident that some will not buy this game because of this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
greengiant912 Posted August 21, 2009 Posted August 21, 2009 I don't think any of those points change the fact that they will lose money by doing this, I'm very confident that some will not buy this game because of this. Don't kid yourself, you will still buy it. LAN is really not that big of deal. Only a very few will boycott it due to lan, and I bet ya they will eventually break down and go buy it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathmineral Posted August 21, 2009 Posted August 21, 2009 Actually you are wrong, I won't be buying it, even if it had LAN I still wouldn't buy it, I'm not a fan of the starcraft games, I haven't played the first one and I don't intend to play this one either unless I happen to develop a fascination for rts games. I will hoever be buying diablo 3 still most likely. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
greengiant912 Posted August 21, 2009 Posted August 21, 2009 Actually you are wrong, I won't be buying it, even if it had LAN I still wouldn't buy it, I'm not a fan of the starcraft games, I haven't played the first one and I don't intend to play this one either unless I happen to develop a fascination for rts games. I will hoever be buying diablo 3 still most likely. Then whats the big deal? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathmineral Posted August 21, 2009 Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) I just feel it is fair to have LAN, it will be there anyway. Edit: Now that I think about it I can't help but wonder what the big deal is now, it is going to be there anyway just because some fellow will have fun making a crack for it, so I guess we really shouldn't care about whether the company includes it or not. Edited August 21, 2009 by Deathmineral Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK_ Posted August 21, 2009 Posted August 21, 2009 i actually have no plan to buy SC2. but i guess claymeow is right , its upto blizzard what they do with there game Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zertz Posted August 21, 2009 Posted August 21, 2009 Chump change or not, you're also making three major assumptions: 1. All 100k signatures are unique real-life people. 2. All 100k signatures actually represent potential buyers. 3. All 100k signatures will not purchase the game if LAN is not added. I'm going to guess that all three of those points fail. That. And if they do include LAN, many people will just borrow copies from others and not buy it anyway. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xPETEZx Posted August 21, 2009 Posted August 21, 2009 I dont really understand the whole concept of attempting to stiffle Piracy by preventing LAN play. I mean look at C&C anything past RA2, that had LAN play, but you couldent just use your CDs on 2 different computers, cause it had CD keys. If it detected the same CD on the network more than once, it did not allow the 2 players to play together. So its really a mute point. Its not like including LAN play would mean hundereds of ppl could leech off on legal copy, and all play LAN. They are still gonna need different keys, and if they are getting Key gens, they will just go get a LAN crack. So the kind of people this will hinder, is as always, the paying customer... Ah well. I wont be buying SC2 anyways. Never played SC1, cause it just never appealed to me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fogel Posted August 22, 2009 Posted August 22, 2009 Not sure why people who have never played SC1 and have no plans to play SC2 even care what happens to SC2. Like Verran and Clay, I grew up playing SC1 over LAN with friends and it was (and still is) the funnest PC gaming moments I've had. I am extremely disappointed to see SC2 not include LAN play. Though it seems these days most people would rather game over the internet than come over ...even for Xbox 360 gaming. About the only time I can get people to come over for some gaming now is for parties I throw every now and then, so it would be great to have this option. If nothing more than to introduce friends to StarCraft. But in end, how much of my SC2 gaming would really be devoted LAN gaming if the option was available? ...not much, too many friends would rather game over the net. But if i get into Beta, I will most definitely bring it up and make my suggestion on that. To call this DRM, while technically correct, is no different than what StarCraft 1 had - and that is, if you want to play online you need a legit key. So rather than having the DRM on the physical copy, Blizz is using B.Net to be the gatekeeper. The sad part is, they are forcing all forms of multi-play through this gate, which SC1 did not enforce. I'm sure many developers at Blizz are as pissed as we are about this. Problem is you have numbnuts making these decisions that don't get it because they don't want to. Because some bigshot told them to, they'll leave LAN play out. The developers may or may not code a back door in. And either way, the SC community will crack it and mass distro it. And like Verran said, the only people who will be truly affected are the good honest people who won't download the hack. Either way, while a completely moronic decision it's not a huge deal and most definitely not a deal breaker. They just need to release it already. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted August 22, 2009 Posted August 22, 2009 Don't kid yourself, you will still buy it. LAN is really not that big of deal. Only a very few will boycott it due to lan, and I bet ya they will eventually break down and go buy it. Wrong. I loved SC1 more than any other game for a very long time. No LAN play is a HUGE deal for me and I will not be buying it until LAN play is cracked. Either way, while a completely moronic decision it's not a huge deal and most definitely not a deal breaker. I disagree. It's completely a deal breaker for me (and many others I've spoken to). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now