Comments on: Blizzard chooses cloud over LAN for new game

Game developer Blizzard Entertainment has decided that cloud-based services are more important than LAN gaming. It's a good decision.

[ruckus333]

your starcraft link doesn't work...It sends you to an RV website. You should check your links.

[daverosenberg]

Thanks. We fixed it.

[fubar4fun]

So then am I to imagine that Blizzard has decided that owners of the game will not want to have a LAN Party and play the game amongst themselves. We will be seperated by buildings and distance so they can show off their Cloud Computing concept?!?! That is sheer and utter hogwash!!! Looks to me like Blizzard will not make their sales quota for this title once the LAN gamers find out its internet only. (One can only hope!)

[Lerianis3]

They are trying to make LAN parties 'obsolete' here is what they are trying to do. The fact is that a lot of people don't want to go to a centralized location to play with their friends in a game, they would rather stay at home and connect with them over the internet.

Really, this won't get rid of LAN parties. People will still go to centralized locations to play, they will just all be connecting to their own accounts on the cloud-based service through a router and play online like that.

[-Torin-]

Good luck configuring a router to work with a lan party. Relic has done something similar with CoH. Two people at location A CANNOT login and play a person at location B. In fact those two people at Location A can't even play each other. So unless Blizzard has figured out a way to overcome multiple logins to there system from a singlelocation, they will be in a world of hurt.

[CDubber]

LAME! Who wants to worry about Internet connectivity when playing at a LAN party? This is a POOR decision by Blizzard. I just lost a lot of respect for them. I'll bet they wouldn't have chosen to do it this way in the pre-Activision days.

Boo, Blizzard. Boo. Now they can add "users who won't buy the game for lack of LAN connectivity" to "users who don't pay money for software, period, but choose to pirate it." Way to cut off your ear to spite your face.

Bah.

[reboog711]

It sounds to me like we're just connecting to their servers, similar in concept to World of Warcraft or other MMORPG. I also notice that there is no mention of cloud computing in the quotes you offer.

What makes you [the Author] think this implementation is related to cloud computing?

[daverosenberg]

Because Blizzard and others have (supposedly) big plans to move all of the gaming infrastructure outside of a base install to the cloud. The first things we'll see are social aspects along with updates and new features. They can make a lot of money by selling incremental stuff in-game and it has to come from somewhere.

[pentest]

What makes you think could computing is a meaningful term?

What it describes is exactly what WoW offers. cloud computing is nothing more then a distributed mainframe over the internet.

Lame marketers just came up with the term to make it sound modern.

[KhalidYousif]

Stupid decision, this means LAN party for these games are impossible when there is no Internet connection or was limited.
Definitely the worst decision ever, I hope nobody else will follow such poor model.

[daverosenberg]

I think you'll see a lot more of this happening as companies focus on distributed players.

[waymon04]

As long as there is no monthly fee ill be fine with this decision.

[Lerianis3]

Agree totally. If there is a 'monthly fee' (which I think that they are planning on doing), I will skip this game. If there isn't a monthly fee, I will jump on it immediately.

[redmarine]

There is no monthly subscription for playing StarCraft II or Diablo III. Although you'll still have to pay for World of WarCraft after the merger between the servers and Battle.net 2.0.

[Endo13]

I guess Blizzard just doesn't want our money very badly any more. An RTS with no LAN support is as useless to me as a car with no engine.

[daverosenberg]

If you have enough bandwidth then your LAN party will be fine.

[fsfranco]

Exactly dave! "IF" you have enough bandwidth. and "IF" there is internet at all.

[ExoCorsair]

So, um, pro games are expected to be played over the internet?

[sharmajunior]

I don't care much about whether Blizzard descides to go with cloud based computing for games, what I do care about is whether or not Blizzard will wrap their games in DRM. If they do, they are gonna go down like Spore on Amazon but this time, we are ready.

[Tod Smith]

They will suffer for this!

[AeroJonesy]

Further proof that "cloud computing" is nothing new. Battle.net has been around for a decade. Sometimes I think CNET has a buzzword quota...

[tekwiz4u]

It's all about the MONEY!!! LAN = NO MONEY.

CLOUD = MONEY (14.99 month). That's why they're doing it. It's not so difficult to put the feature in, but it's all about how to make people keep paying them.

[AeroJonesy]

Battle.net accounts have been free ever since they were created. Don't confuse a WoW subscription with a battle.net account.

[tekwiz4u]

Oh....there's no confusion. WoW is moving to Battle.net anyway, and we still have to pay. I have a feeling SC2 will be subscription based to play, even though battle.net is a FREE signup. So beware.

[redmarine]

It has beens tated countless times by Blizzard that playing on Battle.net 2.0 will indeed be free. So **** idiots.

Ofc you'll still have to pay for WoW after the merger of Battle.net 2.0 and WoW servers.

[est005]

This is the most horrible idea I have ever heard/read. Minus points got to Blizzard for stupidity.

[subsider34]

This is a horrifying idea. I've seen far too many games loose their online multiplayer servers, now Blizzard wants to do away with the only real alternative for multiplayer gaming. Sure Blizzard might not want to now, but I can see it happening in the future with reps describing it as a "hard decision".

[chrissd]

B-but.. Don't know about you ppls, but if I have a LAN party, I don't want to use up my net with that. Here in Aus we get charged speed AND data usage. This'll be a crap game for LANing if it's all through the net. And here I was saving for that game.. Oh well. There's other games coming out

[chrissd]

A minor edit, Warcraft 3 happens to be one of the biggest LAN RTS games there is. I can't go to a LAN party/cafe without War3 coming up. Blizzard just lost their main selling point.

[fastdude7]

Definitely will not be buying this game then.
Internet in Collage is a rip-off, and i don't want to "save up" internet for a LAN.
Oh and yes people do want to be in a centralised location, it makes a better LAN. ie a group of friends playing games all against each other in the same place.
This cloud based multiplayer design is going to suck especially when i am at a friend house who does not have internet.
POOR effort blizzard, I hope everybody resists buying this product.

[gareth_pn]

"the next version of Starcraft II" - will that be Starcraft II 2?

[gordianknots]

I would argue that the big reason that Warcraft III and Starcraft II were popular was because they are such great LAN party games. Yes, this lead to some piracy, but it also lead to lots of sales. Obviously, sales wouldn't have nearly been as good if it hadn't been for the LAN parties. I get the feeling this is a decision being made by some know-it-all manager at Activision-Blizzard who's acting under the delusion that every pirated copy would have been a sale. (Activision-Blizzard, despite the name is a massive multinational corporation of which the Blizzard game studio is a small part.)

[ddcom]

this title is incorrect and misleading, Battle.net is using client-server model, if they were using the so called "Cloud model" your computer be nothing more then a terminal, no processing or rendering, no program to install. it would run on pretty much anything, big drawback of this is bandwidth and latency

what blizzard are doing is just disabling the LAN multiplayer, so people have to play online therefore have valid CD Keys, and battle.net account, you still need to install the game and have good enough graphic card

there a big different between client-server model and the so called "cloud model"

[servermaker]

this is what happens when people try to throw around buzzwords versus explaining what is really happening. perhaps the author's goal was to use the word cloud to attract attention/readers. perhaps the author has a definition of cloud that is not in line with yours (or mine). assuming you both have the same definition for cloud, perhaps the author doesn't really understand the technology at work here and believes it has something to do with "cloud" computing. In any case, an attempt to label what is going on with the word "cloud" is probably not leading to analytical clarity with regard to what is being done by blizzard...though maybe clarity is not what the author is after...

[pentest]

Nope, no difference.

Name a "cloud" application where the view is not rendered on the client.