Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New Details For Battle.net 2.0

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the upgrades dept.

Games 96

The folks over at DIII.net combed through information from Blizzard employees about the revamped Battle.net that is slated to debut with Starcraft II. New features will include Achievements for various old and new Blizzard games, improved communication and community features, and better replay and spectating functionality.

cancel ×

96 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

KEKEKEKE (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24853397)

Good news.

So, GPG Online? (2, Insightful)

mr_mischief (456295) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853461)

Seriously, isn't this what Microsoft and Sony have done for consoles and other game companies have already done for the PC? I wouldn't expect it to be big news that Starcraft 2 will be expected to keep up with features Battlefield 2, Team Fortress 2, and Supreme Commander have.

Re:So, GPG Online? (1, Funny)

Starayo (989319) | more than 5 years ago | (#24855123)

I don't see what the Gauteng Provincial Government have to do with TFA at all.

Re:So, GPG Online? (1)

BloodyIron (939359) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861221)

Considering Blizzard was one of the pioneers for online gaming (Battle.net for diablo 1) I would say that it's fine that they're doing these things. Since the last battle.net game they released was 6ish years ago, they obviously have to play catch-up.

Ye Olde Battle.net does not suffice.

It's like a dance! (5, Insightful)

Bieeanda (961632) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853479)

...Jay Wilson has even said that Diablo III won't even contain any other networking functionality besides Battle.net.

One step forward, two steps back! Cha cha cha! Thanks guys, but some of us do, you know, LAN?

Re:It's like a dance! (1, Troll)

mr_mischief (456295) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853587)

They need to have your personal information and to have you logged in to their server before the game will work. Otherwise, the freetards win. Pay no attention to the piles of cash behind the curtain. These people are starving without you paying customers bowing to their authentication requirements.

Re:It's like a dance! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24854259)

I didn't realize being rich precluded you from being compensated for your work. With an attitude like that, perhaps you'd prefer they didn't bother developing Starcraft 2 at all, seeing as you don't feel like they should be paid for their effort.

Re:It's like a dance! (3, Insightful)

mr_mischief (456295) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854575)

Being rich doesn't preclude you from being compensated, but that's either a nice little straw man or an entirely mistaken reading of my post.

What being rich from selling games should preclude is the attitude that the paying customers must jump through hoops because the rich development studios are going broke from people freeloading copies of the game. You can't be a big, profitable game company and be going broke from piracy at the same time. It's not possible.

Re:It's like a dance! (1)

marco.antonio.costa (937534) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854921)

They're not going broke from piracy. They just don't wanna lost any revenue to it.

While I myself do not purchase products that make me jump through hoops just to use them. They need a better model if they want my money.

Re:It's like a dance! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24856181)

Kill the pirates! we no have enuff moneys.

So why not charge an insane cost so that anyone with a fucking brain will see they are being raped and say screw it. And everyone else will just give us all their money for a couple hours of game play.

It's perfect!

I mean it's not like piracy figures are bloated propaganda to begin with.

Re:It's like a dance! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24856251)

If you consider entering a 10-20 character key "jumping through hoops", you have serious typing deficiencies, and probably aren't the target audience for a PC game.

But of course, on the other hand, if you think "not buying out of protest" and "illegally downloading for your own enjoyment" are the same thing, you have serious mental deficiencies, and not only aren't the target audience for the game, but probably would be better off in a padded cell without computer access at all.

I mean, it's not like banks aren't rolling in money, what gives them the right to make me jump through hoops just so I can withdraw all the money from your account?

Re:It's like a dance! (2, Interesting)

billcopc (196330) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861617)

Entering a 20-character key once, that's fine.

Having to authenticate to a remote server every time you want to play, and being locked out of your game if either your connection or the servers' goes down, is a wholly different beast.

And as others have mentioned, LAN gaming should not involve remote authentication. In fact, a lot of LAN parties don't even have net access, especially if they're renting the venue, or sometimes you just don't feel like dicking with your iptables for a bunch of greasy IRC buddies who are likely to surf kiddie/horse/goatse pr0n.

Re:It's like a dance! (2, Informative)

devman (1163205) | more than 5 years ago | (#24857997)

I think your argument of hoops is really a stretch considering the fact that Battle.net has always been free, you just need a valid key, and it's not like you need to sign on to Battle.net to play single player. There are a bunch of reasons why LAN play might have been excluded piracy could just be a side effect, not having to bother coding or testing it is probably a bigger cost savings.

Re:It's like a dance! (3, Interesting)

mcbridematt (544099) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853817)

I look forward to the PvPGN folks setting Diablo III free.

Re:It's like a dance! (1)

Kingrames (858416) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854649)

...and subsequently getting the everliving crap sued out of them?
"*Achievement unlocked!* prepare to be boarded!"

Re:It's like a dance! (1)

phantomcircuit (938963) | more than 5 years ago | (#24855337)

another implementation did and was sued, they relocated to another country and it hasnt stopped them

Re:It's like a dance! (1)

HeronBlademaster (1079477) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853881)

Agreed. I don't like Diablo II online because it's too laggy (even though I'm on 15Mbps fiber). If I want to play with my friends I start a LAN game and we play over Hamachi. I'm quite saddened that Diablo III won't be able to do that.

Part of Globalism is say goodbye to Local-every... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24854731)

Vivendi Blizzard knows it, and part of the fascination of their doctrine is that none need a local government. If they think you are mis-behaving online, they'll terminate your key authentication or if the alleged content is "indecent" they'll compel you into their courtroom in the sponsership of their judge to rule how odd your fantasyland activities of Goatse Taco-Felcher Daggonmut (clvl 69 ass-grabber) is evidence that you are not to be within 50' of a minor and conditional release from the Court as to be a registered "public offender."

Why do you fucking tards keep buying their software? Even look what happens when free software like Tremulous over on SST servers can be hijacked by a bunch of jack-booted thugs because their fictional rules forced on you don't match the environment rules on the server. Then the SST admins bait you into their private administrative tribunal to register with SST outside of the actual game server if you don't want your IP and subnet blocked entirely, not to mention someone else could go on your WAP through Tremulous to entice them from banning or *gasp* complaining to the Internet Service Providers (not your internet, remember that) to terminate your contract for things you've not done but are liable for an open Access Point.

Oh dear shit, Anonymous Coward to post must "submit" the comment to Slashdot and its related nazis. It's in your subconcious: you were never free, and complain about somthing else while shackled in your prison cell of a jailhouse without walls outside of the jurisprudence of the original country...divided into free trade zones by municiple corportations resmembling a town's CITY OF instrumentality, escourted by Jesuit Illuminati agents of the World Bank/Club of Paris/Bank of International Settlments through GATT and the Pan American Union of the Trans Texas Trade Corridor.

http://spirituallysmart.com/ [spirituallysmart.com]
http://vaticanassassins.org/ [vaticanassassins.org]
http://conspiracycentral.net/ [conspiracycentral.net]
http://hobbleknot.com/ [hobbleknot.com]
http://catfreedom.com/ [catfreedom.com]
http://suijuris.net/ [suijuris.net]

Just another day in a legislated Democracy overlayed upon a a republic hosted by the transient kings persuin equitable relationships with currency for mortgage and limited liability debt discharge exempt as not lawful money to lay dormant a public by incorporation through Savings to Suitors clauses..

Re:Part of Globalism is say goodbye to Local-every (1)

HeronBlademaster (1079477) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859439)

they'll compel you into their courtroom in the sponsership of their judge to rule how odd your fantasyland activities of Goatse Taco-Felcher Daggonmut (clvl 69 ass-grabber) is evidence that you are not to be within 50' of a minor and conditional release from the Court as to be a registered "public offender."

Perhaps this is just feeding the troll... but do you have any evidence that Blizzard has done anything of the sort? I'm quite sure that if there were such an occurrence, the news would have been all over Slashdot, and yet I can recall nothing...

Moderation is fighting words and libel/slander. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24862655)

HeronBlademaster,

I didn't call anyone or even would label you a troll. I hear you easily because none have painted you.

Who labeled that post as troll you think? If Slashdot was an open system, then it would actually display the moderations with the userID of the moderator. You speak of such an occurence of 'news' from a corporation that was never part of the "freedom of speech" clause. What entitled you ever to be a champertain or to hear the skirmish of someone that you aren't party with? That's not gospel on the tube you feed your eyes from, it's Your programming; to be more diametrically aware to your surroundings to the adjusted socially-comparative behavioral negation between Obamma and McCain. Why didn't you hear of the 1,000 other candidates that you didn't know about, that are more qualified than Paris Hilton?

I've been hitting the books on this, and I posted enough website URL's to entice discussion, yet am labeled "troll" by an anonymous administrator wanting to push the thought aside. Here is how I see Vivendi/MTV's Blizzard Inc:
  (1)the 3 main/original developers have left the company, and are not on the corporate payroll, and evidence was they were not comfortable with what the company has become yet by non-compete clause can't speak their actual thoughts or will be sued.
  (2)every title feels like its Warcraft3 with improvements and image/environmental changes.
  (3)as all likeness to U.S., is evincing a service economy that will draw usability into a post-purchase fee that will never end.
  (4)the receipt from the store clerk doesn't represent the implication of Vivendi/MTV's Blizzard license that somehow forces the end-user to grant permission to Blizzard to administer the console computer through termination of accounting, exposure to lawsuits derived by use, non-payment of a service fee places an inferior use on the title and product independent of their domain, etc.
  (5)sporting events recognized throughout the world...that bleed into public exhibitions that are prohibited by same license agreement yet waived upon passage of large sums of cash.

Blizzard has become a double standard. I'm satanic and look at how lame their representation of satan has somehow made its way into their lame Diablo title. People actually pay for this libel? Do you see me mis-representing the Catholic church as though they were a bunch of godly, god-fearing/loving people that don't intend any illwill or germ warfare on their neighbors? I just want to worship satan without a bunch of canibals dressing in Christian, Catholic, and Budhist clothing looking to devoure all that my kind have built up in universality.

Re:Moderation is fighting words and libel/slander. (1)

HeronBlademaster (1079477) | more than 5 years ago | (#24863315)

It is quite possible that all 5 of those points are true, however none of them even remotely resemble your earlier remark, which I requote here for your convenience:

they'll compel you into their courtroom in the sponsership of their judge to rule how odd your fantasyland activities of Goatse Taco-Felcher Daggonmut (clvl 69 ass-grabber) is evidence that you are not to be within 50' of a minor and conditional release from the Court as to be a registered "public offender."

In any case, it looks like most of your complaints are applicable to virtually every software company in the world so I don't know what you're so worked up about Blizzard for.

Re:It's like a dance! (1, Insightful)

stickytar (96286) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854065)

Not necessarily backwards as they are overcome some of the slowness of the old LAN days. Doesn't anyone else remember having to install IPX to get Starcraft to work? :) We frequently have LAN parties with World of Warcraft with a single cable modem connection and can all play easily without a hitch. The downside is having to have an internet connection, but the fact is internet is so ubiquitous these days it shouldn't make a difference.

Re:It's like a dance! (4, Informative)

AlphaGremlin (878335) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854925)

Not necessarily backwards as they are overcome some of the slowness of the old LAN days. Doesn't anyone else remember having to install IPX to get Starcraft to work? :)

Having to install IPX hasn't been a problem for years, so that argument doesn't even make sense any more.

We frequently have LAN parties with World of Warcraft with a single cable modem connection and can all play easily without a hitch.

Not everybody has a decent connection like that. Plenty of people are stuck on ADSL, where you're lucky if you have 256kbps upload. I'm sure I'll be thanking Blizzard for dropping LAN play when I've saturated my connection and suffer horrible lag, not to mention the lag we already get here in AU when playing on US servers.

The downside is having to have an internet connection, but the fact is internet is so ubiquitous these days it shouldn't make a difference.

Not every situation where you'd want to play games includes an internet connection. I've been to many LAN games held in halls and schools with 200+ people where there's not an internet connection in sight, and that's exactly the sort of situation where you'd want to load up a game and have 8 or more people roll over the legions of hell. No LAN play makes it impossible.

And this completely ignores the other benefit of LAN games, and that is hackable characters.

If someone else wants to join a LAN game that is already in progress, you can simply copy your existing character, rename it and free up the skill points so they're all ready to drop in and start playing in minutes with all the quests and waypoints set. Or to make the game quicker we'd create an amulet with the maximum number of bonuses you could place on an item.

Being able to edit the characters was one of the things that made it fun. We had competitions on who could hack up the best level 1 Hell-Difficulty character! Or we'd amp up the useless skills until you had level 200 Teeth and could one-shot bosses. It was stupid, silly fun, and that's part of what made the game last long after it should have gotten boring.

Granted, allowing local characters online was foolish, and they should have never had open Battle.Net. But dropping LAN play will mean that I, and a lot of my friends, won't be buying it. It'll be just like Hellgate:London.

Re:It's like a dance! (1, Informative)

DeliciousChickenSoup (1356427) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854975)

I was going to buy Diablo III, until I heard that it did not contain LAN play. Thankyou Blizzard, I will just pirate it instead now.

Re:It's like a dance! (4, Funny)

GaryPatterson (852699) | more than 5 years ago | (#24855725)

Pirating it will make it work on a LAN?

Wow, these clever pirates!

Re:It's like a dance! (1)

DeliciousChickenSoup (1356427) | more than 5 years ago | (#24855841)

no, but it's the multiplayer I would have bought it for, not the singleplayer. But now that you mention it, such hacks do exist for diablo 2 to facilitate playing online without using battlenet, so I wouldn't be surprised if such a thing were created for diablo 3.

Re:It's like a dance! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24855995)

yea, D3 will be popular enough that eventually a fake-bnet crack will come out (like they did with D2), or a unlock-the-lan-crack... after all, modders have made GTA:SA and Oblivion multiplayer... well sorta at least, and these games didn't even have networking built into them, i'm sure this game could also be hacked to do LAN/hamachi play.

Re:It's like a dance! (2, Insightful)

Idiomatick (976696) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858457)

Yes, yes they will. You can even setup WOW/WC3 to work on LAN if you pirate it and its an mmo not remotely setup to work that way. Obviously not much is known about the guts of d3s net setup but i'm sure it will be similar. You'll likely need to download a fairly light ap along with d2 to run the server on one machine and have everyone connect to it. Essentially battlenet will be hosted on your lan.

Re:It's like a dance! (1)

lukas84 (912874) | more than 5 years ago | (#24856143)

Plenty of people are stuck on ADSL, where you're lucky if you have 256kbps upload.

Hm? My old (consumer) connection at home was 6m/0.5m (ADSL). Currently at 20m/2m (VDSL). At my company, most of the branch offices have 20m/2m ADSL2+ connections.

If you only have 256kbps upload, you either live somewhere in the montains, or don't pay enough.

Re:It's like a dance! (1)

AlphaGremlin (878335) | more than 5 years ago | (#24856637)

Hm? My old (consumer) connection at home was 6m/0.5m (ADSL).

Who were you with that offer such an odd plan, let alone 512k upload? The best ADSL plan I've ever seen other than 512/512 is 8000/384.

Currently at 20m/2m (VDSL). At my company, most of the branch offices have 20m/2m ADSL2+ connections.

ADSL2+ simply isn't available at a good proportion of exchanges, so there are a lot of people stuck with either slow ADSL or getting ripped off with Cable.

If you only have 256kbps upload, you either live somewhere in the montains, or don't pay enough.

We're on the edge of Melbourne, right about where it starts to become a rural area. We pay quite a bit for a decent download limit (95gb), but we're over 5km from the exchange so the best we can sync at is 1500/256.

And I know I'm not in the minority because I have friends all across the city who all have similar connections. 1500/256 is pretty standard for those who don't have unlimited internet budgets, or who aren't in the inner suburbs. Lots of people who can't have their mates over for a game of Diablo 3 because Blizzard won't add LAN play. Lots of people who will thus not be buying it.

Re:It's like a dance! (1, Funny)

LeafOnTheWind (1066228) | more than 5 years ago | (#24855213)

I take two steps forward
I take two steps back
We come together cuz opposites attract
And you know: It ain't fiction
Just a natural fact
We come together cuz opposites attract

Sorry. Had to do it.

Re:It's like a dance! (1)

spartacus_prime (861925) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858771)

I take two steps forward I take two steps back We come together Cause I'm dressed like a cat.

Re:It's like a dance! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24855929)

Yeah, I think we'll have to keep playing World of Warcraft at those LAN parties instead. Oh wait.

Re:It's like a dance! (1)

jasenmh (125829) | more than 5 years ago | (#24856123)

Lol, LAN. How 1990s. =)

Re:It's like a dance! (1)

pdusen (1146399) | more than 5 years ago | (#24857603)

2008 is calling... we and ours LANs miss you. Please come back.

Sounds like something I know... (2)

kcbanner (929309) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853493)

Sounds alot like some software named after vaporized H2O!

Re:Sounds like something I know... (0, Redundant)

chubs730 (1095151) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854869)

Yeah? So? Vaporware isn't usually considered as such until it's overhyped and overdue. They haven't even announced it yet, and it's not something so revolutionary that it would even be likely to become vaporware.

Re:Sounds like something I know... (1)

kcbanner (929309) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854879)

Silly, I'm talking about the ever-popular Steam.

Re:Sounds like something I know... (1)

chubs730 (1095151) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854987)

Heh, yeah. See below.

Re:Sounds like something I know... (1)

chubs730 (1095151) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854929)

It's been less than a minute and I've just realized you were referring to steam. It's late, my apologies.

Re:Sounds like something I know... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24862337)

Yes, I'm sure that blizzard is the next company to produce vapor ware. Seriously, this is genius.

You know if they crapped in a box and sold it, it'd still be a best seller?

OCD Compulsive Tidiness Achievement (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24853553)

Congratulations! You have unlocked the OCD Compulsive Tidiness Achievement for Diablo 2.

You picked up every single pile of gold, potion, ring, scroll, armor and weapon from the Blood Moor all the way to the Throne of Baal.

Re:OCD Compulsive Tidiness Achievement (3, Funny)

3p1ph4ny (835701) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853601)

Throne of Destruction. Baal is in the Worldstone Chamber.

Sorry, as someone who has wasted literally thousands of hours of my life playing the game, I feel obligated to correct you.

Re:OCD Compulsive Tidiness Achievement (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24853669)

Apparently you didn't notice Baal and his throne on the final level of Worldstone Keep? If you had done Baal runs you should know what I'm talking about.

Protip: Baal runs don't usually involve killing Baal. :)

Re:OCD Compulsive Tidiness Achievement (2)

3p1ph4ny (835701) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854433)

> Apparently you didn't notice Baal and his throne on the final level of Worldstone Keep?
I did. What's your point?

> Protip: Baal runs don't usually involve killing Baal. :)
You clearly haven't played to 99 since 1.10.

Re:OCD Compulsive Tidiness Achievement (1)

Macgrrl (762836) | more than 5 years ago | (#24869909)

Have you been looking over my shoulder? That's exactly how I play. You make it sound like a bad thing.

The most important feature... (1)

IorDMUX (870522) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853575)

Resolution greater than 600 x 800? Really?

Re:The most important feature... (2, Interesting)

HeronBlademaster (1079477) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853901)

I hope you mean 800x600. Or do you play with your monitor sideways?

Seriously though, I've always been confused why they don't issue a quick patch to Diablo II to let us play it at a higher resolution. I can't think it would take very many changes...

Re:The most important feature... (1)

nmb3000 (741169) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854425)

Seriously though, I've always been confused why they don't issue a quick patch to Diablo II to let us play it at a higher resolution.

In all fairness, they did increase the resolution from 640x480 to 800x600 with the Diablo II LoD Expansion pack. This was a huge benefit to play (and re-play) motivation.

What I'm surprised about is that they haven't done anything for Starcraft's resolution. The only thing I can figure is that at some point the game reached an "untouchable" status where they didn't feel it was right or fair to make such a sweeping change.

In any case, I'm hoping Starcraft II has something akin to Supreme Commander's strategic view, so you can zoom out far enough to see more of the battlefield. I'm not holding my breath though.

Re:The most important feature... (2, Insightful)

Moridineas (213502) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854711)

What I'm surprised about is that they haven't done anything for Starcraft's resolution. The only thing I can figure is that at some point the game reached an "untouchable" status where they didn't feel it was right or fair to make such a sweeping change.

I don't think they wanted to change the viewport size--can make a big difference.

Re:The most important feature... (1)

i.of.the.storm (907783) | more than 5 years ago | (#24869621)

That doesn't make sense though, because in Warcraft III when you change resolution the viewport stays the same. If you edit the registry to use a nonstandard (widescreen most likely) resolution, you get a stretched picture but no increased viewport. I think it's more that recoding the graphics engine would have been a pain and maybe some of the people who did it originally had left by the time 640x480 became woefully small.

Re:The most important feature... (1)

Moridineas (213502) | more than 5 years ago | (#24873739)

That's one of the big advantages of having a 3D game engine--when you change the resolution you can effectively "zoom" in and out.

Starcraft was all sprites and 2d. This means that every graphic in the game is actually the size you see on screen. If they had wanted to keep the aspect the same, and the viewport the same, but allow multiple resolutions, they would have had to make more graphics.

If a stretched picture is all you want, most LCDs give you the option--you can stretch 640x480 to 1680x1050 if you want. It'll look like crap, but that's up to you :)

Re:The most important feature... (1)

i.of.the.storm (907783) | more than 5 years ago | (#24875985)

Well, the thing is, you can do that, but you can also not, and just scale the rendering code by a constant to keep the viewport the same. Blizzard does this for Warcraft III, and so they would have done it for Starcraft too had it been using a 3D engine. And for the widescreen thing, there is a difference between having the monitor do the stretching and the graphics engine doing the scaling - it looks remarkably less crappy when the engine does it. It's still stretched, but at the native resolution of your monitor so it's not ugly.

Re:The most important feature... (1)

Moridineas (213502) | more than 5 years ago | (#24879729)

Well, the thing is, you can do that, but you can also not, and just scale the rendering code by a constant to keep the viewport the same.

Ok, so then you have low-res graphics magnified at 2x or 3x or whatever. Which is the same as what LCDs do.

Again, the difference between War3 and SC is that War3 was built from the ground up to support multiple resolutions, and to use OpenGL to be able to scale 3D. SC is all low res bitmaps. The only thing they could do that would make SC work at higher resolutions is to create new graphics!

Re:The most important feature... (1)

i.of.the.storm (907783) | more than 5 years ago | (#24879973)

Ok, so then you have low-res graphics magnified at 2x or 3x or whatever. Which is the same as what LCDs do.

No, it's not the same because when the 3D engine is doing the scaling it outputs at the native resolution. LCD scaling is crap, except for the very few (for example, Gateway has a 30" I think called XHD3000) that have dedicated scaling chips.

Again, the difference between War3 and SC is that War3 was built from the ground up to support multiple resolutions, and to use OpenGL to be able to scale 3D. SC is all low res bitmaps. The only thing they could do that would make SC work at higher resolutions is to create new graphics!

Well, first of all it's DirectX, not OpenGL, and of course it supports multiple resolutions, it's using 3D graphics which can be rendered at any resolution. I never argued against that. My point is that allowing multiple resolutions doesn't mean that the viewport size has to change.

Re:The most important feature... (1)

Moridineas (213502) | more than 5 years ago | (#24882155)

No, it's not the same because when the 3D engine is doing the scaling it outputs at the native resolution. LCD scaling is crap, except for the very few (for example, Gateway has a 30" I think called XHD3000) that have dedicated scaling chips.

I'm not sure you're understanding how this works? The native resolution is completely unrelated to what resolution a game or OS runs in. The "native resolution" means--for an LCD--the actual number of pixels. A game or OS CAN run at the native resolution, or it can run at another resolution taking up the actual pixels, or it can be stretched by the LCD, or it can upscaled via software. But this is all kind of irrelevant to the issue at hand, because Starcraft...cannot...do...scaling.

Actually, if you're interested, try running war3 at a bunch of different resolutions, and look at the non-3d parts of the game--the panels, UI, etc. It can give you a better idea of how Blizzard can make war3 resolution independent, even with bitmap graphics.

Well, first of all it's DirectX, not OpenGL

Golly, I had no idea my OSX (and OS9) computers supported DirectX. I wonder how Blizzard managed to do that, amazing! (tongue FIRMLY in cheek)

I never argued against that. My point is that allowing multiple resolutions doesn't mean that the viewport size has to change.

Which, again, was never in dispute! The reason Blizzard did not make Starcraft--a 2D game with a fixed viewport size--support multiple resolutions is the same as I've said in every post in this thread! I'm not sure what we're even talking about anymore :p

Re:The most important feature... (1)

i.of.the.storm (907783) | more than 5 years ago | (#24883771)

I'm not sure you're understanding how this works? The native resolution is completely unrelated to what resolution a game or OS runs in. The "native resolution" means--for an LCD--the actual number of pixels. A game or OS CAN run at the native resolution, or it can run at another resolution taking up the actual pixels, or it can be stretched by the LCD, or it can upscaled via software. But this is all kind of irrelevant to the issue at hand, because Starcraft...cannot...do...scaling.

Grr... I know all that, my point was that the LCD's scaling algorithm is much inferior to having the graphics engine do it. It looks a lot better when an LCD is running at native resolution. That had nothing to do with starcraft, and only relates to Warcraft III. My point was in your first post, you said

I don't think they wanted to change the viewport size--can make a big difference.

which is irrelevant because they could have had multiple resolutions of sprites and kept the viewport size the same, like they do with Warcraft III except without sprites obviously. I've plenty of experience with War3 at different resolutions, I think I've played over 600 hours of Warcraft III lol. In any case, I think this discussion has gone on far longer than it needed to.

Re:The most important feature... (1)

Moridineas (213502) | more than 5 years ago | (#24889121)

I think I've played over 600 hours of Warcraft III lol.

Unfortunately, playing video games doesn't have too much correlation with programming knowledge etc. Unfortunate because if it did, wed have a shitload of awesome programmers out there :)

In any case, I think this discussion has gone on far longer than it needed to.

Hear hear.

Re:The most important feature... (1)

i.of.the.storm (907783) | more than 5 years ago | (#24890239)

OK, well I've also programmed games using DirectX and Java2D, albeit as an amateur, and I know what goes into that kind of stuff. But whatever.

Re:The most important feature... (1)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854989)

People actually like the difficulties in controlling things in SC. It makes it challenging, competitive. For better or worse SC is just as much about skill in micromanagement and multitasking as it is strategy.

Blizzard is really trying to appeal to SC's hardcore crowd with SC2. They're purposefully doing things to force you to micromanage - like making you "refill" the Vespene Geysers.

They will not let you "zoom out" as you could in Supreme Commander. It would cause far, far to much of a change in the way the game is played.

Re:The most important feature... (1)

ildon (413912) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858325)

800x600 has been available in Diablo 2 since 1.0. Long before the expansion. Hell, I was playing in 800x600 in the barbarian stress test demo before the game even came out.

Re:The most important feature... (1)

3p1ph4ny (835701) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854465)

A guy wrote a 3dfx glide wrapper that I've been using successfully with Wine for ages, it's available here: http://www.svenswrapper.de/english/index.html [svenswrapper.de]

There's lots of nifty features, including being able to resize to an arbitrary resolution (note: it just makes everything bigger, since there are still only textures for 800x600). However, you can't play with it and mods at the same time (mods require you to force Direct3D rendering). That's not a downside for legit Battle.net players, though.

Re:The most important feature... (1)

Rebelgecko (893016) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854645)

IIRC you can play Starcraft on battle.net and Diablo II using a direct IP connection using mods as long as all the players in the game have the mod, so it could potentially be a downside.

Re:The most important feature... (1)

phantomcircuit (938963) | more than 5 years ago | (#24855343)

It would require essentially no changes... in fact there is a hack that changes the window size available already (some of the textures become strange)

http://www.edgeofnowhere.cc/viewtopic.php?t=348984 [edgeofnowhere.cc]

Will they fix the security issues? (3, Interesting)

felipekk (1007591) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853613)

Currently, Warcraft III requires your password to be 3 characters long and is case insensitive (clod). Hopefully the newer version will include some revamped security...

(I've only tested this with Warcraft III, not sure about other games).

Re:Will they fix the security issues? (1)

3p1ph4ny (835701) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853631)

I can confirm that passwords are case insensitive for Diablo II as well.

Re:Will they fix the security issues? (1)

sunami (751539) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853715)

And WoW.

Re:Will they fix the security issues? (1)

marco.antonio.costa (937534) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853819)

My passwords are in mixed-case, you case-insensitive clod!

Re:Will they fix the security issues? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24857973)

Even World of Warcraft passwords aren't case sensitive, and those aren't even for battle.net and protect infinitely more interesting stuff.

Re:Will they fix the security issues? (1)

Mortimer82 (746766) | more than 5 years ago | (#24855103)

No doubt Battle.net 2.0 will allow players to bind a Blizzard Authenticator [blizzard.com] to their accounts.

Re:Will they fix the security issues? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24855509)

Anyone who is that careless deserves to loose their account. Blizzard doesn't care, it's more hassle for them and it's not like you're paying a subscription. You paid for the game, get to play on-line for free; at least cover yourself.

Re:Will they fix the security issues? (1)

felipekk (1007591) | more than 5 years ago | (#24855899)

Except someone just confirmed the problem on WoW also, where you do pay for a subscription.

Re:Will they fix the security issues? (2, Informative)

Nathanbp (599369) | more than 5 years ago | (#24862649)

WoW passwords are case insensitive as well. (Really, I'm not joking, they are.)

Achievement unlocked! (3, Funny)

SheepLauncher (1025544) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853657)

Congrats You just Lurker rushed a noob! ACHIEVEMENT UNLOCKED!

Re:Achievement unlocked! (4, Funny)

thanatos_x (1086171) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854545)

http://ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20080804 [ctrlaltdel-online.com]

Not sure if that was a reference or not...

Also this was apparently news about a month ago. (At least achievements)

Re:Achievement unlocked! (1)

SheepLauncher (1025544) | more than 5 years ago | (#24855153)

Now I feel dumb as hell as CAD has this joke well somewhat. I have never read it legitimately because i found it to be extremely dumbedd down but oh well.

Why do people write this stuff? (4, Interesting)

nobodyman (90587) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853761)

From the article (emphasis mine):

As Blizzard is learning from WoW when it comes to server infrastructure where they are battling hackers and exploiters, the new Battle.net will be built on programming that prevent any form of hacking or cheating.

I hope this is zealotry on behalf of the fansite rather than Blizzard developers actually claiming (with a straight face) that Diablo III will be unhackable. Diablo III will be hacked, in the same way that every Blizzard game has been hacked, in the same way that virtually every retail game on the market has been hacked. The true test will be how vigilant Blizzard is in policing this sort of thing, how quickly they can patch compromised releases, their ability to prevent cheaters from poisoning the community at-large.

Re:Why do people write this stuff? (1)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853889)

Maybe. Sort of. It could be something as simple as encrypting your character save with the CRC of the binary that crated it (or something similar). Even if you connect to battle.net, using the legit binary, the save won't decrypt and you are stuck. Sure, this isn't fool proof, but it puts a LOT of worker on the crackers.

Re:Why do people write this stuff? (4, Informative)

Slow Smurf (839532) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854127)

Characters were stored on the realms(battle.net) even in diablo 2. This was the "Closed Realm" option. "Open Realms" let you play your character in single player etc, and were trivial to hack, by design.(the file was entirely plain hex values for hp and so forth)

For the most part, the only "hack" on the closed realms was duplicated items.(though to quite an absurd degree at times) There were not many hacks other than a map hack, which wasn't THAT good.

Re:Why do people write this stuff? (1)

WombatDeath (681651) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861621)

I've been playing Diablo 2 again recently (singleplayer, offline) and have wondered how duplicating items worked on closed realms. If you assume that the server knows what items each character starts with and what items are subsequently dropped, which seems like a reasonable assumption, surely it's fairly straightforward to do a periodic check and determine the legitimacy of each item?

I suppose it must be harder than that since the developers aren't stupid, but for the life of me I can't see how such rampant duping could go unresolved.

Re:Why do people write this stuff? (1)

The Living Fractal (162153) | more than 5 years ago | (#24862333)

Mod parent down.

This is coming from someone who helped run a successful business on selling Diablo 2 items. Trust me, duplicated items were small-time. We sold thousands upon thousands of duplicated Soj (stone of jordan) rings at a HUGE profit of over $30,000.

But the real interesting stuff was the IST hacked items and the rarely generated bugged items that you could get the game to produce under certain circumstances. Like a cloth cap that reduces physical damage by 103%. Yep, you were invulnerable to physical damage. In fact, physical damage HEALED you.

And the IST items, they were made by exploiting runes and the socketing code. You could make items that were absolutely GODLIKE compared to anything else in the game. And yes, we sold those too. For outrageous profit.

Just an FYI that even on the "closed" realms, things were not as peachy-keen as you think.

Re:Why do people write this stuff? (1)

srvivn21 (410280) | more than 5 years ago | (#24862903)

For the most part, the only "hack" on the closed realms was duplicated items.(though to quite an absurd degree at times) There were not many hacks other than a map hack, which wasn't THAT good.

But what hacks existed were quite... Powerful. The white gloves [newd2event.net] for instance. There were white rings too.

Not even close. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24863395)

You must have quit playing D2 early on, because there was way more than just the constant dupe bugs. You don't recall that when logging in to the closed realms, the server asked the client wether the character was realm or open? Meaning, people created insane impossible gear on open characters, then modified them to say they were realm chars and logged in and gave the gear to their real realm chars. Any company that is capable of this kind of stupidity will have their games hacked. Just like how WoW has the client tell the server your position, and the server just blindly accepts this. MMOGs weren't that stupidly written in 1997, how the hell is blizzard managing this level of incompetance still?

Re:Why do people write this stuff? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24854139)

If one encrypted it with the CRC of the binary, does that mean the character is locked to the computer, or that select version of the bin?

I vote a different system. Grab a hash of the BIOS ID or other machine serial numbers, and send that up. If a certain computer is used in a number of hacking or exploiting attempts, silently ban the computer by having accounts that are run on there automatically locked after a random period of time. Then, someone trying to exploit for profit will wonder why all his stuff is getting disabled, and not know why.

Re:Why do people write this stuff? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24854197)

I vote a different system. Grab a hash of the BIOS ID or other machine serial numbers, and send that up. If a certain computer is used in a number of hacking or exploiting attempts, silently ban the computer by having accounts that are run on there automatically locked after a random period of time. Then, someone trying to exploit for profit will wonder why all his stuff is getting disabled, and not know why.

What could possibly go wrong?

Re:Why do people write this stuff? (2, Interesting)

kesuki (321456) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854387)

your solution although it sounds simple, is also simple to break. CRCs are very short, are easily tampered with (through hacked system drivers etc) and so on...

but have you ever tried to connect to battle net with a no cd crack for a bliz title? sadly the b.net connection is refused, because to do no CD you need to remove software from the exe, that is easily checked for on connection to blizzard controlled servers.

various cheats are often easily detected, although network sniffing based attacks on battle.net will never be fixable via any reasonable method (does everyone have the bandwidth, and CPU for a game to use 128 bit encryption on every single packet, when some 1,000 packets per second can be generated in a multiplayer game?)

the type of data sent along the lan does include data (such as click locations) that would make a network sniff based undetectable map hack. the best part is all the data needed to generate such a sniffing tool is easily written by comparing network sniff data vs 'saved replay' data. along with a little hex editing, and basically rewriting the entire network stack of the game engine through reverse engineering..

the plus side, is that once written, it doesn't need to be rewritten unless the main game changes how it parses data packets, and you can write nice USB usb drivers that allow keyboard and mouse movements from a 'irc bot' to be sent to a 'clean' unhacked PC running the game client... although certain keyboard/mouse commands are intentionally written buggy to make human bot distinction easy, and they could possibly intentionally create buggy packet formation that would screw up a bot, but not even be seen by a human...

anyways, anything you can think of can be countered. there is no security.

Re:Why do people write this stuff? (1)

Bad Ad (729117) | more than 5 years ago | (#24854669)

but have you ever tried to connect to battle net with a no cd crack for a bliz title? sadly the b.net connection is refused, because to do no CD you need to remove software from the exe, that is easily checked for on connection to blizzard controlled servers.

Actually the original warcraft3 battle.net compatible nocd cracks used to redirect the checks to war3.org (which was unmodified) to get around this.

Re:Why do people write this stuff? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24854037)

I think Blizzard will be doing their best to keep the hacks on the fringes of the game. So far, even WoW is pretty good, where its well nigh impossible for all but those with great connections to find a true hacking utility. There are macroing utilities, but very few utilities that can do warp stuff, or ignore geometry. The utilities do exist, but are limited to a few number of people (and definitely kept out of the hands of script kiddies), and its almost certain that one offered on a BitTorrent server will either be one that the Warden detects (and will ban the offending account in a period of hours), or is just a keylogger for finding account passwords. Account theft is a big business with MMOs, so duping one person and grabbing their info can churn big bucks, even if the account is used as a farming bot until Blizzard bans it.

Re:Why do people write this stuff? (1)

Jack9 (11421) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861701)

Diablo III will be hacked, in the same way that every Blizzard game has been hacked

I'm not sure if you're trolling or just ignorant. I think you meant to say that every game is hacked to whatever extent it can be. That's not the same thing as Blizzard hacks have often been elaborations on spoofs (D2/SC Mapping, Duping, Bnet spoofing, etc) and it's unlikely that this will continue into D3. //pedantic

Re:Why do people write this stuff? (1)

nobodyman (90587) | more than 5 years ago | (#24863981)

I think you meant to say that every game is hacked to whatever extent it can be.

I meant it in the context that the article meant it. And no, I'm not trolling (can't say whether I'm ignorant or not... if I was I doubt I'd know it).

and it's unlikely that this will continue into D3

Ultimately, we won't know until it comes out. I'm basing my opinion on of history, trends, human nature. You're basing yours off of... hope?

Cost? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24854619)

Is it just me or is the one detail still lacking the issue of cost? As this is now a new service (2.0), might it not be assumed that Blizzard will charge for it?

Did I miss a bullet point where they assure us all it will be free?

fast interwebs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24854911)

australian servers or i'm not buying d3 you cheap bastards. thankyou.

Interopability with BnetD? (2, Funny)

apenzott (821513) | more than 5 years ago | (#24855295)

Does this work with BnetD?
What features are not supported by this update?
What backward compatibility is supported?
When will BnetD be updated to work with Battle.net 2.0?

You never know... (1)

nawcom (941663) | more than 5 years ago | (#24855323)

There may just be a bnetd [greenend.org.uk] 2.0 in the near future... I have yet to see every hacker fail at breaking the piracy wall that Blizzard keeps rebuilding. (not hacking into battle.net; think private servers) Perhaps running private battle.net servers will be the answer to playing LAN games - who knows.

More Ping (1)

themildassassin (1094497) | more than 5 years ago | (#24860203)

My favorite feature from the bullet list, -Excellent ping. What's the meme? You're doing it wrong?

No LAN play worked so well for Hellgate: London (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24863013)

Having no LAN play worked so well for Hellgate: London [multiplay.co.uk] I can see why Blizzard would be aching to leave it out of D3

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>