My first and everlasting memory of going to a LAN (Local Area Network, basically a bunch of computers in a dark basement and a bunch of happy nerds) lies more than a decade into the past. I didn’t even have a PC of my own back then, but I had heard that a bunch of friends had gathered together somewhere and brought their computers for some multiplayer gaming. That was a very alien concept to me then, but it sounded truly exciting.
In the basement, two things were going on. One was Quake, the first and supremely best incarnation of the franchise, and Starcraft - which at the time did not even have its expansion, Brood War. I was awe-struck and mesmerised, and has been hooked ever since.
Back in the day, when not even 56k-modems were the given property of each and every nerd - going to LANs were the epitome of gaming: lag-free, free of outside-disturbances and full of joy. Those were great times, but since then a lot of things have changed.
Now, over ten years later when ultra-fast broadband, Youtube and orgasmic 3D-graphics have made gaming - professional or otherwise - accessible to so many throughout the entire world - is there any use for the old-fashioned LAN-play? Should there even be? Yes, is the obvious answer, but in a new way.
Blizzard Entertainment has announced that their coming title Starcraft 2 will not support LAN. This has caused a lot of uproar on fan sites, forums and Twitter - many accusing the company for being greedy and power hungry as they are now forcing gamers to always play against each other via the new pimped-out Battle.net 2.0-platform. So, is that really the case?
Not quite, I would say. First of all, Blizzard has declared that they will not support LAN in the existing definition of the word - but they have not said that they will prevent players from hosting games locally. These thoughts are my own speculations and I do not present them as facts, but what I predict is this:
Internet-access, i.e. registration through Battle.net 2.0, will always be a pre-requisite for playing Starcraft 2 in multiplayer. However, a new function - that will not be called LAN - will enable the matches to be hosted locally, as a hybrid-solution in between old-school local area network and full online-gaming. Blizzard has, as I interpret it, hinted towards something like this - though I am the first to admit that I might be wrong. However, I do not think so. Why?
Because, Blizzard has great ambitions - they want to write a new chapter in the book of professional gaming and electronic sports, with themselves as both editor and publisher. They aim to make Starcraft 2 into the number one platform for digital competition, and for that they need control - which they will achieve through the new Battle.net 2.0. Having said that, control cannot come at the expense of accessibility.
It makes little sense to make Starcraft 2 impossible to play in multiplayer without über-fast broadband, as the game will require a lot of bandwidth to run smoothly. Rather, for a company with resources such as Blizzard, it would be easy and convenient to allow for local hosts that are connected to their larger network. This would enable them to enforce their anticheat-algorithms, rules and (yes) advertising - but maintaining the accessibility that has always been the trademark of Blizzard games.
To summarise, I argue that it’s too early to believe all the negative hype around Starcraft 2 not supporting LAN. Blizzard Entertainment know what they’re doing, but they also know how not to give everything away at once. An online-only solution would make be a major obstacle for large-scale tournaments - such as the prolific World Cyber Games and the Korean leagues - and grass-root college campuses, such as the blooming Collegiate Starleague.
An intermediate solution, connecting the power of local hosts with the glimmering awesomeness of Battle.net 2.0., would create a whole new world of possibilities - and that’s the kind of business that Blizzard are masters at. Hence, LAN is not dead, it will be resurrected in a far more powerful form. A bit like Robocop 
These are my thoughts and speculations, and I know that many would argue differently. Do share your views and opinions in the comments below
Related Posts
|
|
![Audio interview with Sean ‘Day[9]‘ Plott - Starcraft Guru & eSports Gentleman](http://polygonrevue.com/wp-content/themes/thesis/custom/images/custom_fields/day9-interview-banner.jpg)
![A Rivalry Through The Ages - Slayers_`Boxer` vs [NC]YellOw](http://polygonrevue.com/wp-content/themes/thesis/custom/images/custom_fields/boxer-yellow-banner.jpg)
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
Very interesting idea. I could see how a hybrid system like that would have its advantages.
Blizzard is in an interesting predicament. It has quite a spectrum of needs to to fulfill. From casual gamers, to groups of enthusiasts, all the way to the professional gaming leagues of Korea.
I for one, am really interested in how they tackle the networking issue. I know they have an eye for detail over there and won’t let something big like this just slip through the cracks. I am hoping they do come up with something that is a good experience and fulfills the needs of their users(ie: me) Good post. we’ll see what happens.
Myself, I blog about gaming for the sheer love of it, and play simply because it’s fun. Had I been naturally more talented at it, maybe I would have tried to be the next Idra, but as it is - just enjoying Starcraft as the best eSport in the world is good enough in itself. Still, I do realize that makes Blizzard go around is money, and their development decisions are guided by that.
That is why, ultimately, I am convinced that they will enable local hosting of Starcraft 2 multiplayer. That way, far more players will hace access to the game, giving Blizzard a larger audience that not only buys the game but will also be exposed to their other revenue streams - i.e. advertisements, which is by far the most lucrative source of green.
It will be interesting to see exactly how they accomplishes this, but I have faith. Thank you for leaving your comment
I really don’t mind the lack of LAN provided there is some way for me to host a game locally. I’ll authenticate with Battle.net but I really don’t want to do this for every game (or if my connection goes down I don’t want to have my game terminated).
So here’s an idea for Blizzard:
Force users to authenticate themselves of battle.net (and upload and download whatever stats and info it needs to) but then allow the user to check out this authentication or something so that future local games can be started without having to authenticate. This “check out” thing can expire after 24 hours or something forcing you to authenticate again (plus maybe include an option for the people that have uncapped broadband connections that always authenticates). This way I could at least arrange for access via dial-up (yuck) when I’m away from my (or any) broadband connection…dial-up…authenticate…download/upload stats…check-out…disconnect.
Up until now I’ve felt betrayed by Blizzard…but I guess it’s actually because it was announced more as a “F*#k You!” then a proper announcement that felt sincere (because we all know piracy is not to blame for their decision).
Blizzard should have not announced the exclusion of LAN without also including the relevant details on Battle.net and how the local games would work.
Anyway…let’s hope they do the right thing!
I completely agree with you - authentication with Battle.net is an agreeable evil and, depending on the perks, a potential good. The important thing is to allow for local area network-stability and high latency, and as long as that happens, I wouldn’t mind to launch via Battle.net first. Hopefully, they will see the sense of this and not make it too hard for players to gather together in a semi-offline environment.
Also, Blizzard made a clear mistake in announcing this information in such a casual and vague way - all the flaming and negative speculations that have erupted all over the web could have been avoided if they had only kept their mouths shut and revealed these news along with their (still secret) proposed solution. A big Blizzard-blunder, that one, which lost them a lot of goodwill. I have faith that they will recapture our belief in them and the game of Starcraft 2, but this matter clearly show that they have yet to properly master the art of marketing.
As you say, let’s hope that take on board the criticisms and present the community with a good solution. Thank you for your insightful comment