Slashdot Mirror
Warcraft III: The Single Player Experience
Disoriented writes "Cool interview about the Warcraft 3 single-player campaigns. Has me drooling for a June release." Hopefully Blizzard will drop their attack against Bnetd before the release.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Blizzard has always been known for its multiplayer offerings, but ive always thought its games were better single player games than most as well
"The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else." - Bush 05
I wonder if I can choose to control a priest in the single player game?
I could go around clicking on people until they say "Why do you keep touching me?"
*Ducks the barrage of Troll moderations*
...who wants to tickle the orc single player?
Hopefully Blizzard will drop their attack against Bnetd before the release.
Yeah, and that makes up for them launching it in the first place. Sorry, they'd have to do a lot more than simply "drop the attack" before they'll get me to respect them as a company again.
Mozilla's a nice operating system, but it needs a better browser.
As was the case with starcraft, this should be a good game right out of the box first time. After that comes the expansion (aka the tweaking) were the characters are adjusted based on the playing styles of gamers and unintended exploits. That's if Blizzard lives up to it's reputation, of course :D
Warning: you suc
Who wants a storyline? I want gameplay. I skipped over the stupid cut sequences in WCII and got down to playing the actual game. Who wants tighter integration of cinematic sequences? I thought those sequences were just for screenshots for sales purposes. I don't want to have to watch them. Gameplay is what made WCII great! Not storyline, not cut sequences. Strategy and action!
-- SIGFPE
Even with the whole thing about Blizzard and Bnetd. They are still one of the only Video Game Publishers that distribute their games for both Mac & PC in the same cd pack!
As companies merge and take-over there will be more and more sections in them with conflicting (or passively disagreeing) ideals and methods. Just because one section does one action doesn't necessarily mean that the whole company is bad.
Actually, I'm planning on mailing a letter to Blizzard and Vivendi Universal's staff congratulating them on Blizzard's new release of Warcraft III.
I'm also planning on saying that I had been really looking forward to continuing as a customer of theirs but that their unreasonable lawsuit against the makers of bnetd made me want to seek out products from competing companies that worked with their users rather than against them.
I don't care how much "Ooooo shiny!" factor it has, Blizzard and Vivendi Universal have annoyed me enough that I'm not interested in their latest offerings.
People are talking about sending in letters say, "I will not buy your products". That's nice, that's good even, but we all know Blizzard won't pay a huge amount of attention to a few of these. They would pay much more attention to Slashdot editors forwarding this post to them and saying they would have posted it, except that Blizzard is violating basic standards of conduct in the treatment of bnetd. Bad corporations don't deserve free advertising, and putting in a small note about bnetd does not make this any less of an advertisement.
Maybe it isn't free advertising. Commercial sites such as CNET's are very interested in the slashdot crowd ;-)
"I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
A trend that I've noticed is that everything is multiplayer now. Great games are the ones that everything is designed and scripted out, random attacks, plots, and sucky players don't make a game great, they offer diversity and may make it interesting but a true game is one that plays like a book, unfolding a plot in front of you. I haven't seen any good multiplayer games do this yet.
Just a reminder to those of you who are boycotting Blizzard, but still want your fantasy gaming fix.
Neverwinter Nights will be coming out this summer, and while it is an RPG (rather than RTS), it should do a good job of filling the void left.
Though, personally, I was more excited about NWN than WC3 even before the lawsuit.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
Legitimate uses like what?
I don't mean to be rude or ornery about it, but I honestly can't think of any. If battle.net were horribly unstable, I'd understand. If the advertisements on it were horribly intrusive, I'd understand. If it were vastly lacking in functionality or options, I'd understand. But it's none of the above. The chat interface is good enough for what it's for, creating and joining games is intuitive and straightforward, and except right around the release of a given game there aren't even many load problems with the servers.
The only legitimate use I can think of for bnetd is if Blizzard someday stops supporting their older games on battle.net. But that hasn't happened yet. You can still get on and play the battle.net edition of Warcraft I if the mood struck you.
The only reasons I can see that people would be using bnetd instead of battle.net are that they want to avoid having to have a legal registration for their games, or battle.net's servers are, at some point, temporarily down.
In the case of the first reason, it's quite obvious why Blizzard wouldn't want people doing it. And as for the second, the obvious prevalence of the first would, to me, if I were part of their legal staff, Far outweigh any wish to help out their users by letting them have alternative servers.
Maybe Blizzard really wants to help their users and feels bad, as a company, for coming down on bentd. But they Do have to protect their product, and there really are no obvious legal uses for the system.
This isn't like the RIAA coming down on the existence of mp3's and computer cd players, or the MPAA cracking down on people recording Anything on their expensive tivo. Let's take it in a little perspective instead of just going with the ol' knee-jerk "Look! That company isn't letting the open-source community do whatever it feels like! EVIL!"
"If a man hasn't discovered something he will die for, he isn't fit to live" -- MLK, Jr.
Hopefully Blizzard will drop their attack against Bnetd before the release
And if they choose not to drop it, I hope the community speaks out by choosing not to support them by buying it. It is really easy to bitch about companies and their policies but how many of us actually do something about it?
I for one will not be buying it and will send them a letter explaining why I have passed up Warcraft III, and possibly future titles by Blizard.
How many though will say they were wrong to shut down bnetd as they hand them $50?
'Same speed C but faster'
- Linux advocacy, with a corollary to open source
- The Underdog, regardless if it results in board inconsistencies in the apparent Slashdot "platform" (and the instant it's no longer the underdog, it's on the chopping block)
- Science and gadgetry, regardless of lack of substantiation or extreme buzzword content.
This story didn't fall directly under any of these biases, explaining why the original comment poster felt it was non-topical to Slashdot. Harr.The shoes on a bank robber's feet are being used to commit crimes too. Kitchen knives, cars... even baseball bats.
Now, if you had an ounce of sense, you'd see just how retarded your post was. Maybe, just maybe, it would make a little sense, if Bnetd could only be used with the pirated versions of games. This isn't the case at all.
And unlike a tool of vandalism, Bnetd *adds value* to Blizzard games. It makes them better, more playable. Would there be a law against baseball bats that magically clean windows and repaint walls when smashed against them?
Bnetd is the friend that Blizzard had, but never appreciated, and now actively hates. The funny thing is, Bnetd *still* adds value to Blizzard games. It can't help but do that.
Bnetd is the best thing to ever happen to Blizzard that they never appreciated. I hope it somehow comes back and bites them in the ass.
How many though will say they were wrong to shut down bnetd as they hand them $50?
Not me; I'll simply be handing them 50$.
I'm not generally apathetic, but over this particular issue, I couldn't care less. If it turned out that Blizzard executives needed to drink the blood of open source programmers daily to ensure the continued high quality of their excellent titles, I would consider it blood well drank.
~jeff
From my experience as a (very lucky) beta tester, I feel the game will be awesome. After trying the multiplayer, I'm actually looking forward to the single player campaign, something I haven't done since Dune II. As for the bnetd issue, I feel that misplaced or misguided is a much better description then 'evil' of Blizzard's/Vivendi's actions. From Blizzard's point of view a week into the public beta, there were already more PIRATED versions of a BETA of its product then most companies get with a final. So acting to protect their investments, they attacked the first target they thought was responsible, none of this 'they are evil anti open source' bullshit.
Bnetd won't matter when Warcraft3 comes out because then people can buy it to play instead, of pirating the beta--which is like 99% of the interesting in bnetd at the moment.
IGN ran a similiar interview with bill roper about the same subject.
hope y'all enjoy version number 16 or is it 18...
cookie cutter video game design....
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
You would bet? Not that it's easy to get statistics on such things, but your "bets" don't count for anything. Nor do mine. And as prejudiced as you seem to be towards this sort of thing, is it any suprise that you'd think it is only ever used for illegitimate purposes?
You're so fucking clueless, I don't know where to begin. Bnetd isn't even contributory... warez dudes can still play single player without this software. They can still run ipxtunnel. We might also ban computers, by your logic, after all, the BSA suspects that as many as 95% of computers worldwide don't have their licenses in order!
News flash for dumbass! By the time someone uses bnetd, they've already committed piracy. Even Vivendi isn't using that attack, because they not only know it isn't true, but because they know it such a laughable position they couldn't take it to court. Now they've got some half-assed argument that we're violating their copyrights by participating in an unauthorized public performance (which might make some sense, if they were playwrights, and Bnetd were a broadway show not paying royalties). Haha, dancing orcs.
The best thing to happen to blizzard? Well, there are people who love their products so much, that they were producing complimentary products. In software, this is a GOOD thing. When people write complimentary products, there is that much more reason to buy your product, because there is more that can be done with it. When people design extra levels, or addons... they still have to buy your product first, and yet there is more incentive to buy it too. Quite possibly, they might not have bought it, if such an addon hadn't existed, but there is no reason to ever think that they'll refuse to buy it because of the existence of the addon. The same holds true for bnetd. No longer do you have to worry about battle.net being overcrowded with cheating assholes, if it's that much of a problem, you have alternatives short of not playing/buying the game. Also, bnetd is open source. Should these people come up with a really cool design/feature... Blizzard would be welcome to use it on the official server. Not to mention that it is rare for a studio to have so many enthusiastic fans. If nothing else, bnetd should be evidence of that. Lord knows there are any number of studios out there, that would kill for such. Some might even have the sense to not kick such fans in the teeth.
No, you've been able to play ipx games.
Not "lan games".
IPX.
So, for some people that only have TCP/IP set up, or can't get IPX to work, this is a legitimate option. At least until fuckwads like you do your best to see it illegal.
The worst happens to people who wait for it.
No. Don't ever fall for that trick.
You can easily and justifiably blame Blizzard. They didn't pass the DMCA, but they are happily using it. If corporations were somehow decent or moral (yeh, I know) and refused to exercise the dubious privileges granted by the DMCA, it would be moot. Hell, it'd even be easier to repeal.
Congress manufactured the gun, but Blizzard/Vivendi had absolutely no qualms about pulling the trigger.
I more than just approve of this, I'm almost proud and certainly respectful. I almost wish I had whatever it takes to perform such an action.
I even almost wish it could have some effect. The sad truth is, you're probably doing it to make yourself feel better, because it isn't going to have any effect whatsoever on them.
WarCraft II Battle Chest, $60.
Diablo, $55.
Diablo expansion pack, $25
Starcraft, $45
I remember paying close to top dollar, no bargain bin copies for me. At the time, I remembered thinking it was worth every cent. Hope no belittles me for reconsidering that sentiment.
Also, I find it unlikely that not playing their games will have any effect on their future actions. Not that I will play, just the principle of the thing. But I harbor zero illusions that I can somehow punish them.
No, "bnetd" isn't one of their trademarks. They aren't accusing the bnetd developers of trademark dilution.
Why is it, that everyone that defends them is a complete moron with very little understanding of the actual situation? And it does no good to point this out, because next week, your vapid little brain will have forgotten all this, and you'll latch onto yet another intellectual property term that you're incapable of understanding.
Is Bnetd a trademark violation? No, nor does vivendi claim that...
Is Bnetd a copyright violation? No, they didn't copy Blizzard's code...
Is Bnetd a patent violation? Again, no, neither the games nor the network protocol are patented.
Is Bnetd guilty of contributory copyright infringement? No, it isn't used to disable copy protection or trade games ala a p2p net, and all piracy occurs well before using bnetd
Is Bnetd a trade secret? Not any more, and no bnetd authors have worked for Blizzard, this doesn't apply.
Is Bnetd a military secret? Well, the pentagon hasn't lodged any complaints, though I sometimes suspect those 2 star generals like to play a quick game of starcraft from time to time.
Is Bnetd guilty of pissing off a big corp with nasty lowlife lawyers? Yes.
Is Bnetd safe, even though they've broken no laws? No. $$$= laws, $$$=favorable judgements. They might as well bend over, lube up, and spread their cheeks now.
Are stupid fucking dimwits who claim bnetd is a piracy tool actually causing problems for the authors of bnetd? Well, yes, if indirectly. Every time a Sen. Hollings wants to pretend he has support for the latest consumer rape law, he can point to a retard like yourself, jacquio, and claim that he has the support of enlightened citizens. Your stupid voice is much louder, than my halfway intelligent protest.
Well, the lawyers/orcs will only metaphorically fuck the bnetd authors. So I'm not sure this is a valid question.
The question wasn't whether Blizzard has a right to make what they want. The question is why they think they have the right to keep others from doing the same.
Some of you retards need to have some sense beat into you.
Oh, you are just browsing with too low of a threshold 8^)
"Send an Instant Karma to me" - Yes
Hopefully Blizzard will drop their attack against Bnetd before the release.
They won't, but let's face it: it doesn't matter. Has the MPAA stopped shoving css & other protection down our throats? Nope. Is everybody still buying DVDs and going to see movies? Yep. Has RIAA stopped acting like complete strongarm jerks? Nope. Is everybody still buying music? Yep. Is Microsoft still bullying the crap out of small corps & OEMs? Yep. Is everybody still booting to Windows to play games? (I'm looking at you Taco) Yep.
We all get angry around here whenever some article is posted about evil corporation X, destroying small guy Y and screwing over populace Z. We're all up in arms about how we are boycotting them, and everyone should do the same. But we don't. We're just talk. Most of us anyway.
So don't hold any pretentions. We're all buying Warcraft 3 when it comes out, bnetd or no bnetd. We're gonna buy it, play it on our windows partition while listening a cd and playing a dvd in the background.
I'm getting modded down to flamebait aren't I? Crap.
I am BelDion's
No, you fucktwit.
It's used, so that I don't have to play on battle.net with cheating assholes like yourself.
They wanted to implement cd checking, but Vivendi is too busy fucking people over like these guys. Failure to implement copy controls in bnetd isn't bnetd's problem. It's Vivendi's problem, and Vivendi isn't even willing to let bnetd fix it... which was actually rather thoughtful of them.
And Vivendi's own legal arguments tell the fucking lie... they have no case, especially the one you're trumpeting. They are using some legally obtuse theory actually meant for dramatic stage plays.
No, fuck you, you stupid syphillitic asswad. Fuck your lousy pointless trolling, and your seething hatred of logic and constitutional rights.
Outlawing bnetd, is like finding a coffee shop that warez dudes hang out at, and shutting it down for that reason. The piracy happens someplace else, has nothing to do with the *legal* coffee shop, and the vast majority of the coffee shop customers are doing nothing wrong. It is a legal tactic employed by ruthless corporations accountable to no one, and performed by lawyers that should be disbarred and tossed in a federal prison cell for a few years.
This isn't napster, napster actually performed, as its primary function, transferring the files around. This isn't a game cracking tool, which performs as its primary function the copy control breaking. This is primarily used by legal copies of Blizzard games, by people who want a little more control over the experience.
Honest to god, is the entire world populated by retards like the parent posters? This hurts him too, and he's cheering it on. Humanity didn't evolve from proto-monkeys... it never evolved at all.
So? If I were to write windows software, I'm not legally required to do the whole WinXP serial checking, to make sure that the copy of windows isn't pirated. For good reason, that isn't the duty of my software, or me.
If bnetd interacts with a game, it isn't bnetd's duty to check the game for validity. Legally or morally.
That's right, you hit the nail on the head... keygens are good enough for the installer, in other words, piracy happens long before they go near bnetd. Bnetd has nothing to do with it.
So, exactly why is it that bnetd should be illegal?
Thank the good Lord for warez, err.... did I say that out loud?
Mod my comments down. It'll be fun.
Bnetd isn't great in an ideal world.
It is great in a practical world, the one I live in.
Most people don't use it for piracy. The only thing suggesting that, is your inane ramblings. Show me the statistics. Barring those, show me some kind of evidence, anything.
The truth of the matter is, the games it is useful for, are long gone in the "0 day warez" world. Those people don't care. Besides, if the piracy is sucha big problem, they'd have so much more sympathy AND ease in fighting the piracy, not honest legitimate software developers.
Then, there is the entire discrimination angle... Vivendi isn't going after the other software that is used in a like manner. Probably because even a bought and paid for judge would have a hard time outlawing ipxtunnel.
That you even mention the cd check, is laughable. They aren't circumventing it at all. They didn't write one, they don't have to. If I write windows shareware, I'm not obligated to have my shareware check if the WinXP serial is valid. Neither is bnetd. Circumvention, implies that cd checking was already there (which it wasn't because it's their own software) and they NOPed it out. They elected not to write something, which in reality they couldn't write anyway. Without the cd key database, there is no way to check, and Blizzard refuses to let them check. In effect, Blizzard is guilty of preventing bnetd from checking. Try that on for size.
Most bnetd servers were semi-private, 5 maybe 10 players. Preventing cheating was easy, invite only those you trust to begin with, and if they make things intolerable, ban the fuckers. Let them run their own.
But then again, if you weren't just another troll that never bothered to actually know something before attempting to mouth off about it, you'd know all this already, right?
Warcraft I and II were downright boring in single-player mode. Every scenario, you'd build up some guys, dealing with the occasional visitor as you did so, and then wander out to an enemy infestation.
Create a formation. Send a fast unit forward to draw them out. Fall back. Swat them as they charge haphazardly into your formation.
The only time the game really got interesting was on the second-to-last scenario of each campaign, where both sides had a lot of stuff, the game was biased against you, and you actually had to struggle to stay on top. The final scenario usually had some game imbalancer that could be exploited, like the summon spell that let you destroy whole bases easily without risking "real" units.
Games like the original Command & Conquer and Total Annihiliation worked, I think, for a couple of reasons. One, the base defenses were formidable, and those were usually pre-set by the game designer rather than the AI. Either you came ready to rock & roll or the static defenses would tear you apart. Two, when the computer came to get you, it didn't come for a polite social visit. The computer would build up a large collection of units and then send 75% of them right down your throat. Without solid defenses backed by the right mix of units you were going to get destroyed, or at least crippled to the point where an immediate counterattack was out of the question.
Remember the dreaded Mission 7 in TA? You have a skinny piece of beach and about 10 minutes to prepare for an onslaught of enemy warships? That's good stuff.
Warcraft I and II had static defenses that you could ignore until it was convenient. Slow firing, low damage, especially compared to the NOD energy tower or TA heavy laser. The enemy units sort of wandered at you, one at a time, when they got bored.
Age of Kings did a pretty fair job, with the computer coming after you in force. My only complaint with AOE2:AOK is personal preference: I'm a "builder", and the bonuses they gave to the computer made it difficult to win a single-player scenario if you built up your forces instead of attacking quickly.
In many ways the original C&C got it right and many of its successors got it wrong. I've played every single-player scenario in WC1 and WC2, and because of that experience I never bothered with StarCraft. Maybe they'll fix it this time?
I don't have to show you the statistics that they are using it legitimately. I would like to, I wish I could, but this just only goes to show...
Innocent until proven guilty.
You see, by law, in the Constitution itself, you are indeed innocent until proven guilty. The burden is on you, not me. The only people that ever suggest that it should be different, are usuaally crazy, fascist, or some combination of the two.
I refuse to see the fact that you suspect it may primarily become a tool for piracy sometime in the future, because a game will become more available to the public rather than less. Yes. I would ask you why you refuse to see how ridiculous is, but by definition, the insane are incapable of seeing through the delusion.