Slashdot Mirror
Warcraft III Gone Gold
0x00 writes "Shacknews seems to be the first to report that Warcraft III has gone gold. The press release is here. Blizzard have announced that the game will be available July 3rd around the world - just in time for my mid-year University break (great timing!)." Update: 06/13 15:16 GMT by M : Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game.
First Neverwinter Nights and now Warcraft III?
*starts scrapeing up cash*
Do I need to bring back my old sig?
Editors, put your commentary in replies like the rest of us.
How's the subscription model going, guys?
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
I've been waiting a long while for this one to come out. Now I'll start waiting for the expansion set to be released... :P
Years ago I played tons of WarCraft, loved it, maybe I should have tried 2 too. :)
Maybe I'll buy 3.
New things are always on the horizon
Like my productivity didn't suck enough already...
"Jesus saves sinners...and redeems them for valuable coupons"
that no matter what it is that we're protesting at the moment, that it doesn't really matter because we're not serious about the boycotts.
Say what you like about Blizzard, they make some pretty damn good games.
I have been pwned because my
Editors, put your commentary in replies like the rest of us.
Why? Slashdot is a site where people post links to OTHER news stories, and people comment on said stories. It is not outrageous that the editors put their opinions in the story heading text. Their opinions are always easily distinguishable from the submitter's text, and the link to the original article.
Call me silly but I choose not to play it because it won't run on my computer. It requires Doors or something like that.
Honestly though the only computer I have powerful enough to run it has never had Windows installed on it. My laptop has no hope of being able to play games (without branding the HP logo on my legs.) That in combination with confusing legal moves, I have mixed emotions about it.
And of course no Linux version at all. Please compare Blizzard and id-Software behaviour. Both companies are rich and powerfull. But even if Blizzard is making good games - they just earn money (and sues innocent people to make more and more and more money), while idsoft takes care on OpenGL and Linux.
"06/13 15:16 GMT by M: Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game." Is that really necessary for reporting a story? Shouldn't this be an objective report?
Is to download the game without paying for it and play it on the open servers. That'll show Blizzard!! (And I get the play the game!)
Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game because nono of us buy games to actually play them, right?
I want 2D games back.
I'm not going to buy ANY of your products ever again, no matter how much fun they are.
I just don't like to be spied on.
It's $64.95 list and $79.99 for the collector's edition.
Head to http://www.eff.org and give them the money, then send a letter to Blizzard telling them about it, and why.
Yeah, I'm going to pirate this game, and I suggest you do too. Fuck Blizzard. Fuck them in thier stupid asses.
=Brian
There is nothing so good that someone, somewhere, will not hate it.
"Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game."
How about:
Don't support Blizzard's dirty tactics, download the game on your local p2p network !
It costs that much?!?!
Damn. I think I'll boycott it based on that fact alone. Sheesh.
No, I like your idea about donating the money to the EFF and mailing Blizzard and telling them why. I may just do that.
Ed R.Zahurak
You know, oblivion keeps looking better every day.
While most of us should be ditching anything attached to Vivendi, the lure of Warcraft III is very strong. I know that in my office, most everyone has already pre-bought.
I think we've argued the semantics almost to death in these forums. What we need is some civil resistance, Thoreau style. Quite simply, if you buy this game, you are supporting the oppression of the internet, and most importantly, Evil.
And to borrow from Thoreau, if you should think otherwise, just remember that by paying that poll tax you're supporting the war on mexico, and keeping the colored from voting.
.
Who cares if they're suing people. I'm sorry, just because they don't exactly follow the mores of the Slashdot Community, doesn't make them evil. Certain things are forgivable when you makes games as well as they do.
Some people just like to have a cause.
Well, There is no dbout that this is going to be a pretty cool game, and alot of people are going to enjoy it, however blizzard is being a bitch about bnetd which has a lot of promise. So don't give blizzard your money. If you do happen to buy a copy, please make copies for all your friends, and distribute it to as many people as you can, and we can have the best of both worlds.
problem solved.
So I guess I'll have to buy two copies of the game just for spite.
Blizzard rulez! Slashdot is a little above average!
I know this is slightly off of WC3 topic, but I've heard about a second expansion pack to Starcraft in the works. Have any /.ers heard anything about this?
...in that regard. Games are not so important to me to sacrifice my principles over them.
If it doesn't run on Linux, I'm not terribly interested in buying it. If a company's going to pull the stunts Blizzard has went at lengths to do, I'm definitely not going to buy it.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Death to the DMCA wielding scum and their bnetd lawsuit. May they burn in hell. If you must have this damn game, pirate it or shoplift it. But better to do without and give them no ammunition to whine about the eeee-vil pirates.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
Please consider shutting the hell up!
Mad props to Stewie.
A company that's out to.. make MONEY!??!?!?!?!
Good fucking God, someone alert the presses.
i just lost $50 to a guy. I told him Duke Nukem 4Eva would come out before this...
Please consider the fact that Michael doesn't like puppies before moderating me down.
I got a chance to see the beta at a friend's house.
Yes, it's 3d, but compared to a 3d engine like Dungeon Seige, Warcraft 3's engine and it's camera control scheme sucks.
And the gameplay isn't a heck of a lot different than Warcraft 2. You now have heroes, which are pretty cool, and you can queue your production. You can set a rallying point that new units will move to automatically. But the basics of building as much as you can as fast as you can still stand.
Maybe I'm just tired of the RTS genre...
What he really meant:
Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to pir8 this game.
Google cache here - Not sure if its working tho...
And now we see the true reason NWN's Gold announcement was rushed out the door earlier this week (including barely any beta process and no Linux support in the box).
They just had to get it out before people started getting their WarcraftIII addiction going!
Derek
And here I thought I was the only one currently playing A Link to the Past. I just got to the fourth dungeon in the Dark World. Warcraft III will be good (I procured a copy of the beta), but you can't beat classic Zelda action. I'd rather play many an SNES game before Warcraft III.
------------------------------------
Spiral out... keep going.
Blizzard is exercising its right to not allow anybody except for Blizzard to use the gaming technology that it built! Panic, panic, boycott, boycott!
I think Michael is forgetting one crucial bit of information -- BLIZZARD GAMES ARE NOT OPEN SOURCE. Blizzard built it, people play it; Blizzard has the legal right to choose who they allow to interact with their game at any level. Not to say that interop software would be a bad thing -- id Software and Valve have proven that a game or gaming engine's longevity is closely tied to how accessable it is to the modding community. But if Blizzard has no desire to venture down that path, so be it.
Blizzard makes good games, period. If you don't want to buy them, that's your beef. But don't try to turn this into an open-source crusade -- you're wrong, they're right, end of story. Deal with it.
Will I have more fun playing this game than I did and still do playing Starcraft or is it just prettier. I think Blizzard games are great but I think they're about due for a flop (not in sales, just in longevity). It's clear that this game will sell.
The price is getting STEEP for these highly hyped titles. No way.
And I haven't liked an RTS since Total Annihilation, mostly because it's the only one which got the interface right and had units which are reasonably intelligent in responding to the enemy without user intervention.
Test your net with Netalyzr
Blizzard isn't all that rich, in fact they don't even own themselves.
They are owned by a larger company, a french company I believe. Blizzard does make a few of the most popular games, but that doesn't mean they are the most successful.
Id is sucessful because of the work of one man, Carmack. Without him there would be no Doom and thus no Id. (Don't want to knock the artists, but they needed his engine) Quake was the first game where he didn't do all the work on the engine. So there is a large personal investment in the projects that Id does, while Blizzard is run by managers and lawyers. I'm sure that the programmers that worked at Blizzard would love to see bnetd succeed. Unlike at Id, the programmers can't speak their minds.
While Id is one of the few successful gaming companies to realease the code to their old engines, Blizzard is still selling Diablo 1 in stores. Without an engine available for mass use.
Blizzard is more hard core about protecting their property.
BTW, a few thousand geeks boy-cotting this game won't do anything to the sales, they are expecting the mothers of the world to pick this up for their little johnny or jane to play. Blizzard games sell millions of copies.
There are so many posts about how "i am going to get even by pirating the game"...
guys (or gals), please do not sink yourself to that level. While we agree on the fact that Blizzard sueing bnet.d is questionable (okay, dead wrong and full of malicious intent), we also all know that copyright infringement is wrong. not necessarily as wrong as MS and BSA make it appear to be, but still wrong non-the-less. copying their software will not make things any better. in the end they will just come back with the statistic and say -- look, of COURSE we need to take these legal actions.
the future rests in each of our hands (gosh that sounds lame), that may seem to be insignificant at first, but i really believe that it's an important responsibility.
think it through -- i mean, it IS just a game you know.
My life in the land of the rising sun.
Heres the correct url
Yup... CDR for Warcraft III.
Why pay for a game I will stop playing after some weeks ? This is NOT Starcraft 2.
We want Starcraft 2, not war 3.
Warcraft III and Neverwinter nights.. within weeks of each other?
I need to buy a lot of caffeinated products!
-T
I am the lord of the pun. Dance Knave!
I'm so turned off by the lawsuit against bnetd that I just can't bring myself to support Blizzard anymore.
Nows the time to make our feelings known by NOT making a purchase.
Sorry Blizzard, great looking game but I'm passing.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
The interoperable software allows people to play pirated versions of the game without a CD key or something. Sounds valid to me.
I guess this means I can stop checking the mailbox for my Beta CD.
So...if we can't buy it because we're "boycotting" Blizzard, then would it be morally wrong to pirate it? ;^)
Wooden armaments to battle your imaginary foes!
I guess even Blizzard could grasp how blasphemously ironic a July 4th release date would have been.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
First Neverwinter Nights, Now Warcraft III, Maybe Duke Nukem will be next, eh then again maybe not.
the game really isn't worth all the hype. They originally wanted to make it unlike all other RTS games, going towards their new invention 'RPS'. Well, I guess somewhere along the line they decided that idea sucked, and now what we're looking at is a heavily toned down version of starcraft with new 3d graphics that look like they could have come out around the same time. There are a few things about it that are 'neat', but, to try and make it so you focus more on your hero, you maybe only have like 7 possible buildings you can create, and there isn't a whole lot of variety.
The game got very old very fast after 3 days. NWN on the other hand...
In all honesty, I could care less if they tried to take over the US government and wear beanie hats with little propellers. If the game looks good, I'm gonna buy it. I'm just surprised that you didn't put a comment like that about the Neverwinter Nights toolkit's EULA.
If I wasn't so lazy, I'd have a sig.
You know the guys who founded blizzard were a bunch of hackers who did all kinds of crazy crap and were the brains behind the place? They left the company some time ago..a few years i think. The peeps there now have been trying to come up with new cool stuff but cant seem to get it...battelnet servers suck..no new ideas. They are just rehashing the same games over and over.
I hope they win that court case personally. I write software for a living... people need to get paid for their work somehow. Bnet circumvents key checking which allows for pirated copies to be used... sounds illegal to me.
:)
BUY ALL THE BLIZZARD TITLES YOU CAN FIND. Screw the boycott!
"Update: 06/13 15:16 GMT by M: Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game."
You're right! Boycott everything!
Duping/hacking/cheating isn't friggin' BAD ENOUGH on battle.net. Go ahead and let them COMPLETELY ruin any semblance of order by allowing people to interoperate and "write their own apps" for it.
Give me a break. I'd fight it too.
If that doesn't smack of corporate calleousness I don't know what does.
I'm going to support the eff. I won't be buying Warcraft III. There are TONS of excellent games out there to buy folks, so if you support the eff, show it by not buying Warcraft III and spend your money on another game.
Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
Now can you install that?
"The two most abundant elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." -Harlan Ellison
Right. I'm not going to buy it, and I'm not going to play it, partly because I don't want to, but mostly because I don't have a machine that can play it. Are we clear on that? I am not going to give Blizzard $55.
But given Blizzard's treatement of bnetd, I'm damn well going to download a warez rip of the information that comprises it (which to my Linux machines look like a bunch of gibberish). Because that will reduce Blizzard's bank balance by $55, right? I mean, it does actually remove money from their account and puts it in, er, /dev/null, doesn't it? Because making unauthorised copies costs money, right? Maybe if enough of us do this (be sure to delete the information then download it again and again) we can leave Blizzard owing several billion dollars to... err... wait... isn't there a flaw in this argument?
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Why pay for a game you can get for free ?
It's one of the first Blizzard game we will be able to play on different servers than Battle.net because of BnetD
Bnet was missing in the older Blizzard pirated games, but not anymore
Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game.
Somehow I don't think that a game publisher needs to be held to quite the same interoperatibility standards as an operating systems publisher ... because it's a game. Odds are, no matter how much they sue or how inoperable they are, they're not going to push all other games out of the market.
Am I going to buy it? I'll wait for the reviews on the single player campaign. I never liked warcraft I or II multiplayer - it seemed to be the simple art of running exploding suicide troops at the enemy.
Which borders on unpatriotic these days, now that I think about it.
Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
I am a big fan of all of Blizzard's games. In my opinion they are one of the few really great game companies left that haven't been bought out or turned into nothing more than a publisher. All of their games have been fun to play, as well as having lavish details everywhere from design to story. Have you ever read the manuals to their games? Each gives you a rather rich backstory as to the situation and world in the game. I very much look forward to Warcraft 3. As for the lawsuit. The only really effective form of anti-piracy I know of today is to have a serial code for each gamer, and without a unique one they can't play multiplayer online. This has been blizzard's strategy with almost all of their battle.net games. They are NOT suing just because someone wants to make an open source battle.net; they are suing because someone wants to make a way to by-pass one of the few things they have out to prevent piracy. Blizzard's had a lot of money troubles in the past and as per result even had to cancel some projects I was really looking forward to. Piracy is a problem in the entire gaming industry, it's one of the reasons it's not very profitable anymore. Blizzard's suing because they're scarred, and I think they have every right to protect themselves because I want to see great new games a hell of a lot more than just some open source project that isn't needed survive.
P.S. What another boycott? Jeez! If I followed all of these boycotts, I wouldn't be able to turn on my computer. Sorry guys, Blizzard supporting Mac at the same level of Windows is more important to me than open source game servers.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
We've play Starcraft at work, with 2 legit copies (and 6 people play) with a Battlenet clone.
I know that the BN clones have offered to put the same security into their servers as Battlenet offers so that people can't pirate, but perhaps it's just not an option for Blizzard to give up that info, and then test BNetD (etc) to make sure they conform.
When Warcraft2 came out, Blizzard added the ability for multiple installs off one CD, as "spawns" so that several people could play the game at once. Was a great idea, as everyone who played it, bought it. Even the women in the office (they liked the voices of the peons, etc). I thought that that was pretty cool.
I don't think Blizzard is going over the deep end on this.
Except maybe make you feel better. The game will still sell more than well enough to be a smash hit in sales.
Without going into it too much, I don't put Blizzard at fault, I put WarForge at fault. It was their putting War3 support into the BNetD project that drove Blizzard to this. They had to do something, that this was about the only thing they COULD to stop it.
You have nobody to blame but those who just HAD to pirate the CLOSED beta.
Yeah, you go boycott Blizzard if it makes you feel better. I'll be over there playing War3.
Dark Nexus
"Sanity is calming, but madness is more interesting."
Lets see here ..
.. and will appeal to many people out there. But the style of game has been so badly abused over the past 10 years that it turns out to be the Same #$^@ Different Day.
Warcraft, Warcraft II, Command and Conquer, Red Alert, Age of Empires, Age of Empires II, Start Craft, Galatic Battlegrounds, etc, etc, etc.
Its to the point that you have played so many of these that they all seem to be same game.
Build a base
build units
enhance units
smash enemy
Wash
rinse
repeat
I played a friend of mines SWGB. After about 3 or 4 games, I removed it from my box, packaged it back up again, and gave it back to him.
Warcraft III is prob a great game
Just a ramble.
-- Knowing too much can get you killed, but knowing who knows too much can make you rich.
after considering everything, I believe Blizzard is justified in suing BnetD, considering how bnetd opened the door to piracy of the beta versions of Warcraft III(because BnetD didn't authenticate whether or not the version was stolen or not). On the other hand, I think they should have done more to co-operate with the BnetD project leads, who would likely have jumped at the chance to give Blizzard a hand.
The lawsuit just seems like a miscalculation on blizzards part, and they can't easily retract something like that without losing some measure of credibility.
It's been a long time.
M: Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game.
Ok, I thought about it.
I don't care.
some people like to live in a world larger than their own head.
Their brains have fallen out.
I have been pwned because my
So what if Blizzard wants to stop bnet (a blatant play on battlenet) - it's their game, battlenet is their FREE multiple service. They have every right to control that, this is not an open source or 'power to the people' issue. They're welcome profit from their efforts, and control their own code/games. I feel the same way about that stupid lawsuit from the a-holes at Blacksnow againt Anarchy Online and Dark Age of Camelot. Every game I've bought from Blizzard I've enjoyed immensely, they release very reliable, stable games with a lot less bugs that most gaming companies. They're welcome to my $50, far as I'm concerned, they deserve it - not the people who want to make money off their efforts.
'The unexamined life is not worth living' - Socrates
What right are you talking about that has no foundation in law? Blizzard is falsly suing a group of open source developers for copyright infringement, even though the charge is ridiculous. This is after making threats under the DMCA against a reverse-engineered open source server and then backing off. It's the worst form of legal harassment, and the fact that they falsely accuse the project of being a piracy tool only compounds Blizzard's guilt.
When climbing on your high horse, don't forget about Nintendo. They will sue anyone who tries to release 'unlicensed' software for their platforms, yet they are heavily pimped around here. I imagine Sony and Microsoft have similar policies for their platforms.
The reality of free software.
4.5 million copies already ordered. Do you *honestly* think that by a few /.ers boycotting the game, they'll feel the pain of not being inter-operable?
No, good friends, the solution is not running away from the problem via a boycott, its hitting them where it will hurt. Blizzard likes to spy on you (just like everyone else), and if they can't, they've taken a painful hit.
The real solution is to 1) pirate the game, 2) hack it so that it either sends bogus tracking info back to them, or hack it to work with an open bnetd-like server. Only by being invisible can we make them pay for their close-mindedness.
As they already had Warcrap 3: Lost in Space.
Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game.
That's pretty funny that you mention that, Michael Sims. Ha ha ha! Now I want you to please consider the fact that you, Michael Sims, singlehandedly destroyed the Censorware Project. I have won over fifteen awards for my writings, but you chose to spurn me. Why, Michael, why?
I want you to please resign your post at Slashdot immediately, and cede all of your possessions to me. Including your base.
I'm not Seth Finkelstein. I still speak the truth.
I won't even miss very much since I'm planning on having plenty of fun this summer playing Neverwinter Nights anyway. Despite the iffy EULA on the toolset, it still beats what Blizzard is doing right now by making Bnetd (a program made for legit reasons) a scapegoat for all the piracy out there.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
Then the whole free market system pretty much goes right down the drain. The only accountability will be to guberment regulations, and businesses can screw customers any which way they want because they know if they make an enticing product people will shell out the cash anyway. Use your brains before you go out buying things made by companies who sue your friends and peers for beating them at their own game. Feh. Fanboys.
I can't look into the exact details of the lawsuit since it's /.ed, but I think Blizzard is well within their rights to sue for this.
When Diablo came out, there was a lot of cheating going on. So much so that I didn't even bother playing online, there were too many PK's and people with hacked inventories and levels. Blizzard tried to fix that in Diablo II, but unfortunately my computer kept crashing whenever I played it online, so I was unable to verify it myself. But their solution to prevent hacking was partially handled by the servers, and partially by he clients. If they were to allow others to make their own versions of the Battle.net servers, then this level of protection from cheating would be gone. There could theoretically be cheats in these other versions, which in turn could lead to the same problems with cheating found in the original Diablo. Blizzard is probably afraid they would get blamed for this.
Also, if users log into an unauthorized Battle.net server, they could have "patches" downloaded to their computers which could theoretically wipe out their hard drives. I'm not saying that it is likely, but it is possible and Blizzard does not want that kind of risk associated with their products.
Besides, what exactly is the benefit of playing on a rogue server instead of one of the official Battle.net servers? Is it because people don't want to rely on Blizzard staying in business or keeping the service free? I admit I don't know the whole story behind it, but it seems pointless to me to work on an alternate battle.net server.
I really hate signatures, but go to my website.
Send blizzard a letter with all your credit card information and tell them that they can process it and send you a copy as soon as the lawsuit is dropped.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
GNU: blizzard is bad cause they like to not have things stolen from them and stuff so like ummboycot them
Blizzard:WarCrack 3 is underway in 3 weeks
GNU:And it looks great i'll probably get it but boy cot WarCrack 3 damnit.
When can we say "They've gone to PLAID!"??
the editors additions, they are mispelled, moronic and rarely even have anything to do with the story at hand. Slashdot editors are Morons. Don't get me wrong, I love the site and the code, but as a social conscience Taco is a total failure. I won't even begin to touch on the rest of the very hypocritical /. support staff, DO as we say not as WE DO.
Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game
so? honestly, why is it *that* bad. beter yet why is it even important. i dont have years worth of data saved that i will need to be able to access at a later point in time, possibly using another application by another vendor. its a game. i probably wont even be able to play it on new hardware in 10 years. battle.net is a service that they offer, in order to use the service you need a legitimate cd-key. big deal. i can still rip a copy of warcraft, blizzard doesnt do any of that cd copy protection crap that some groups are known for. when i buy a blizzard game i know that i *OWN* the cd. why is it this way? because blizzard has a great validation system in place called battle.net, let it be. now if they start charging for the service then i might start singing a different tune. but as it stands now im more then happy to *BUY* the game and follow the trivial rules that blizzard has set.
p.s. when will I be able to filter out the "editors" comments?
"Shut up brain or ill stab you with a Q-tip" Homer Simpson
I know it took a long time to come out, but in it's golden years already? My grandpa was like 70 before people started saying he was in his golden years.
Collectors Edition Base Prices:
67.91 buy.com
74.95 amazon.com
74.99 compusa.com
74.99 ebgames.com
74.99 gamestop.com
79.99 chipsbits.com
79.99 worstbuy (aka bestbuy.com)
Regular Edition Base Prices:
47.95 chipsbits.com
52.88 buy.com
59.95 amazon.com
59.95 staples.com
59.99 ebgames.com
59.99 gamestop.com
59.99 worstbuy (aka bestbuy.com)
//m
As to your other example, Ford can certainly sue people for manufacturing after-market parts, if they own a patent on that part. Blizzard owns all the parts to their games, as well as Battle.net.
Here's an example that may be a little clearer. Suppose some people decided to hire all of the actors in Attack of the Clones and made their own version of AotC, with the same scenes, same script, same story. Now supposed these people released the AotC clone, but charged no one to see it.
Don't you think Lucas would be within his rights to sue?
I will not be buying Warcraft III because:
I'm in direct contact with many advanced fun CONCEPTS.
if (you don't get it)
{
you weren't reading slashdot @ 2:01 PM EST June 13, 2002
}
[o]_O
Huh? Actually blizzard is trying to stifle legal reverse engineering. The bnetd project reverse engineered the protocol through IP packets, never touching Blizzard's "technology". I bought a game from blizzard, why can't i use it whatever way i want to within the bounds of the license agreement. They are trying to use the DMCA in way that doesn't even make sense. The DMCA specifically states that devices do not violate it just because they don't offer the full protection of the original device. (i.e. not checking the keys) The DMCA (even though it is twisted all the time) is supposed to be for devices that have the primary purpose of circumventing copywrite protections. Since valid disks play with the bnetd system, I don't see how they can state the the overridding purpose is to circumvent copy protection.
This has nothing to do with the fact that it is open-source. The Bnetd project could be closed-source freeware (free as in beer). It seems like blizzard is using its powerful lawyers to force bnetd to close up shop, because the cost-benefit analysis says they will make bnetd settle and that in doing so they can preserve their profits. While this does make sense from a profit motive angle, it doesn't seem ethical or even worse it really doesn't seem like justice. Welcome to America--the Big guy always wins. I don't care if you're cynical and can say that that is just the way it is; just don't rationalize blizzard's behavior and tell me that is the way it should be.
I'm sorry blizzard can't figure out a way to do copy protection except on the server side....why don't they use a serial number so pirated (arrr matey!) disks don't work on the pc side? Isn't cloning the disks and breaking the key system already illegal? Then why is it bnetd's fault that people can pirate the software and make it work?
Enjoy.
http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?sk u_id=0665000FS10004633
Price: $89.99
And that's NOT including the ungodly 7% PST (Provincial Sales Tax) and 7% GST (Goods and Services Tax) which get tacked on to the sticker price.
$89.99 + 14% = $102.59
And that isn't even for the collector's edition. No wonder piracy is so rampant. Screw you, Blizzard. I'm going to wait until the title drops to AFFORDABLE levels.
Of course, we know that Blizzard just inflated the price because they know people will pay it. Grr.
Posted by Hemos on Thursday June 13, @12:39PM from the going-gold dept. ... ...
Update: 06/13 15:16 GMT by M:
What timezone is the 12:39PM time in? I'm in CDT (-0500), and EDT is -0400. Either way, the 15:16 GMT update doesn't make sense, because it would have occurred before the original story was posted.
How did this happen??
Oh all right, so I shouldn't go and buy this great game because those stinky and evil people from Blizzard want to prevent people from Warezing their Betas and playing them on public servers....
:P
I think some of you just have to grow up and realize that there are things in this life that aren't "free" and "public domain".
No, I don't always buy original software, Yes, I have tried the beta illegally. But at least I am not going to boycott Blizzard because they try to protect their rights. Yeah, rights. Like earning money for their work.
By the way, yea, go on and boycott till your hair falls out, I'm sure Blizzard will be veeery sad about it
Of course, the Sun is actually white, almost by definition. People think it's yellow because they usually see it when it's low in the sky near the horizon, which causes its color to be significantly reddened
by its long path length through the gas and dust of our atmosphere.
Liberal (adj.): Free from bigotry; open to progress; tolerant of others.
Don't they always release the first week of July?
You can laugh without eating a sandwhich, but you can do both if bring one.
Let me see
:(
World Cup Soccer (so far i've only missed 3 matches)
Neverwinter nights.
Warcraft III.
Where does work fit in?
still reading?
1. The have a linux native version.
2. The allow people to run servers under linux.
3. They pull their head out of DX's ass.
That's it.
Ok, so it's bad enough to know that my productivity will be shot to hell by Neverwinter Nights next week. Now, I only have 2 weeks to get a module running DM-less? Argh!
I've got FreeCraft!
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
by warezing it and they haven't stopped playing it for the past two weeks. So I guess there goes $110 in sales for Blizzard already, let's hear it for consumer stealing!
I fully understand why Blizzard stopped bnet. And if more slashdot people had warez kiddie friends that sit on file sharing programs all day downloading apps and games you would understand why too. I have seen the effects of an open source project on blizzard's games and all I saw that came of it was thievery from free internet play.
So I grudgely support closed servers and cd key checks. Its a pain but it the best solution available.
Michael:
/. editor put up, you should post a comment in response to it like the rest of us do.
If you have something to say regarding an article that another
Using your privilege to update the item itself with your opinion makes you look like an ass and undermines the democracy of the Slashdot moderations system.
bnetd is for fags with no money. get a life and and a job for starters and get off your lame ass pentium 2 computer -- nerds.
I thought it was already out? Certainly is one of the most downloaded files on dalnet. Oh wait....
Anyway to quote
Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game.
Dont worry slashdot, I wont BUY the game, Ill get a copy and support people who write software to interoperate with
Blizzards
In college, really poor, need a flatscreen.
The EFF is a fringe group, plain and simple. They simply have willing accomplices at OSDN who will post their tripe left and right. Most of the EFF criticisms winf up using Fear/Uncertainty/Doubt as tactics. The EFF has been made to look legitimate by sites like slashdot and that is an unfortunate thing.
Just go out and buy Neverwinter Nights (in a week or two when it hits stores) and forget all about WC3. If Blizzard's tactics don't appeal to you, support the competition instead! You get a great game, and that should make it a lot easier to let go of your pain and get on with your life.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
The issue in this controversy is not whether Open Source software is better or more legal or required over closed source. The issue is that Companies should not sue independant not-for-profit individuals just because their work happens to interfere (theoretically!) with their business model!
If two mega-corporations want to sue each other - fine, go right ahead. If Blizzard wants to sue Microsoft, or Microsoft wants to sue Blizzard - that's just great. But for sueing people that are not making money from the product they are being sued over, Blizzard needs to be punished. If bnetd were a commercial product, I would probably still buy WC3.
-dbc
Kill me now! You mean FUD and derision. Ignorance and panic. Stupidity and knee-jerk spaztic brain hemmorages. Anything but "Style" and the exact opposite of "Flair".
IMHO, after playing the beta and trying to figure the game out, it is horrible.
I loved Warcraft II and even thought Warcraft was okay. But the game is confusing now as War3. If you think the hero idea is good, it isn't.
Think MICRO-MANAGEMENT. If you had 5 hands the game would be playable, but since you don't, you'll never beat the addicts that play the game 24/7
This lawsuit is malicious and seemingly legally tenuous. It's a classic example of a large corporation bullying a small independant group by scaring with them with a big lawsuit.
It also seems rather misaimed - the bnetd people didn't add the War3 support that Blizzard seems concerned about, this is another group who are not being sued.
I don't think Blizzard will win the case; it is clear that bnetd was created through legal reverse engineering and not, as Blizzard are suggesting, by EULA defying decompilation etc.
However regardless of the outcome Blizzard will have won in that many people will think twice about working on such OS programmes - who wants the stress of a lawsuit?
Blizzard should have done the sensible thing, encrypted their protocol with a private key buryed in the War3 etc. binary where cracking it would be a clear DMCA violation. But they screwed up by making a reverse engineerable protocol and are now suing people to cover up their mistake.
Thats my take on WC3. Skip it. Unless you really enjoy single player RTS games. Blizzard generally does a kick ass job on the single player storyline. But what it all boils down to is that the multiplayer is about 2 years out of date already. Not only did they make ZERO innovations in the RTS genre, they failed to include interface and gameplay features that are becoming standards in today's RTS games. Where is my 'next idle worker' button? Or a way to queue up non-movement orders (or hell, a reliable way to queue up all the different movement orders)? A "Fully 3D" game without a movable camera, give me a break, thats just begging for units lost behind trees and off the edge of the view space.
I admit SC was a great game, but that was like 5 years ago. Blizzard thinks they can take the entire game (mechanics and all) from that long ago, stick new graphics and a new story on it (oh, and dont forget their half-assed Hero implementation), and call it the next big thing. I am just sorry that all the people out there who are deciding to buy WC3 based on how good Starcraft was wont be able to experience the last 3-4 years of RTS development until SC2 comes out 3 years from now.
PS: *IF* the scripting engine is as good as so very few of us are thinking it will be from our investigations then I'll buy the game anyways. Something that revolutionary (scripting is to triggers as triggers were to plain custom maps) can make up for a game with no evolutionary advances.
There's no doubt about it. If anyone has seen screenshots, the interface is very tacky, ugly and bulky.....anyone else agree? Plus, blizzard sues modmakers......fuck you blizzard
I sure as hell won't be buying Warcraft III, and if any of you who like open software have any moral fortitude whatsoever you won't either.
If you support Open Source and buy Warcraft III then you are like a Gypsy buying luxuries from the Nazis. They've been attacking your kind but you still support them? Crazy. Let Blizzard rot in the hell they so very much deserve. Not only do they spy on their customers, now they sue people who haven't done anything other than reverse engineer stuff to make an alternative to Blizzard's piss poor network.
Heck, once they even MENTIONED the DMCA they lost me for a customer for all time. Evil people use evil legislation, and Blizzard is evil. Don't support them. Let capitalism work here for a change.
"There are laws that enslave men, and laws that set them free. " - Sean Connery as King Arthur
Who said I am going to purchase it?! Also, I would have to wait till July 3rd for that. :)
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
How's about Neverwinter Nights?
Mac version this fall, two months later than the PC version.
-- http://frobnosticate.com
Gang Rape. Seriously - you waste some time at the start of the game building up your gang of ugly, smelly, violent and somewhat questionable characters and then you are off to the nearest village to rape, loot and pillage.
Except that there doesn't seem to be much looting, and the pillaging is somewhat non-existant, which basically leaves us the the raping... Gang Rape - two words that sum up the entire game.
Have you played Warcraft III? I have...
"next idle worker button" - has been in the game for months now.
"queue up non-movement orders" - Shift Clicking works for me.
"units lost behind trees" - Trees go transparent whenever units are behind them.
"off the edge of the view space" - You can't send units off the view space.
Tim
Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.
Okay, judging from the posts here, a lot of people really do not get it. The reason you should want to boycott Warcraft III is not because its source is closed. It's not because you want to use bnetd, or even care about bnetd. It's because bnetd is a legal reverse-engineering piece of code, and Blizzard is trying to shut it down.
You may not care about bnetd specifically, but what if in the future you write a piece of code that interoperates with something else? Would you be happy if MegaCorp X shut you down on the precedent that Blizzard set by killing off bnetd?
As an open source developer *and* as someone who cares about fair use, Blizzard isn't getting any of my money. If their revenue models rely on crappy CD key checking, it's not my problem or that of the bnetd authors (although they supposedly asked Blizzard for help with that issue anyway). They're not obligated to emulate the copy protection as well as the network protocols. All they did was reverse-engineer the underlying networking, which IN THEORY is protected by our laws.
So again, I have to say -- stop bitching about people saying "boycott Blizzard" if you don't understand the issue. This is NOT about open source, it is about fair use. It's also not so much about trying to make a dent in their profits, because even if all of Slashdot boycotted Blizzard, they would barely notice. It's about the principle, which for me (and others) is a big deal. No game is worth filling the pockets of lawyers and PHBs that want to take away fair use rights. I'd rather keep that $50 and buy something else, or donate it to some open source authors.
</rant>
"Wow, you're like some kind of superhero able to ward off happiness and success at every turn."
-- Ryan Stiles
I work at Circuit City. If you preorder WC3 there, you will get a free poster. Don't know if it's worth it, but some peeps just like free stuff. You can either spend $12 to order and pay the rest when you get it, or pay the whole price and wait on it. Don't mean to advertise, just thought some of yall would like to know from someone on the "inside".
--- Nothing is secure.
Will wonder how powerful a beowulf cluster of suns would be. ;D
No less authority than Radio Hanoi said so, in fact. My carrier (USS Midway CV-41) helped evacuate Saigon as it was falling in April 1975. Many helicopters landed on us with evacuees, and we later picked up many planes flown out to Thailand. Radio Hanoi said these planes and helicopters were legitimate war booty, and they wanted them back. Since we refused, we were nothing but a bunch of pirates. Our captain flew the Jolly Roger in acknowledgement.
To get serial for a moment, complaining about the new meaning of "piracy" is about as useful as complaining of "hacker" being abused by the press. Words mean what people want them to mean (c.f. Humpty Dumpty), meanings change over time and by region, and it does no good to get snippety about it.
Infuriate left and right
For a number of reasons.
For starters, I bought Warcraft 1 and 2 (and Starcraft). The first one was ok, the second one was more of the same and bored me. More importantly, I play Diablo 2 on a bnetd server because battle.net sucks big time. Too many cheaters and scammers, and too much lag. I paid for Diablo 2 so I am not a software pirate. Being called one is an insult. Max Schaefer of Blizzard said anyone who plays on a bnetd server is a pirate. I demanded an apology and he denied making the statement (this was on irc). The majority of people in the chatroom sided with me (agreeing that Max did in fact call me a pirate in a roundabout fashion).
Because NWN will be natively supported on Linux and because they are making it possible to host your own server, they get my money (already preordered the game).
Yes, it sucks that the Linux support will be delayed. Shit happens. 90% of client machines are Windows based. If you had a deadline fast approaching, which OS would you give priority? The OS that 90% of your customers use or the other one? Answer this question as the department manager, not as a Linux geek. Don't forget your bonus is based on company revenue.
So next week, (oh, please! oh, please! oh, please!), I will play NWN on my Windows partition and look forward to the Linux release (both client and server).
-- Will program for bandwidth
It's they've god given right, they created the Battlenet Servers so players that have a license can hook up with others. The open source servers, don't check licensing. With all due respect but if your against Blizzard because of that, then your just against them for the sake of being against something. That's about as stupid as being against price increases or bandwidth limiting ISPs. It's called Business for a reason People. They are here to make money, no money no jobs, no jobs no income, no income, no slashdot.
Try and put yourselves i nthe situation of others before posting such utter crap!
--Mike
www.merriamwebster.com lists, as a definition of piracy, unauthorized copying of copyrighted works; and, i'm sure the OED does, too.
i know it's annoying to obey laws, but, until they're changed, the only other option is to break them - as in "Breaking The Law".
-c
I have discovered a truly remarkable proof which this margin is too small to contain.
Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game.
Michael, what would the harm have been in posting this as a comment?
It's not a technical correction, additional information, etc. -- things that are logical as updates.
-Bill
SlashSig Karma: Excellent (mostly affected by moderatio
This is rediculous. The whole point of bnetd is to play Blizzard's games. If nobody buys and plays their games, bnetd has lost its purpose.
Either way, bnetd looses.
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
What is it with everyone, today?
For some odd reason, I expected discussion about WC3's gameplay, technology, etc.
All I see is a bunch of people whining, bitching, and moaning... hey, wait a sec. I'm doing the same thing.
Argh.
but the pentium is made by the evil intel, remember? Got to be on a home rollded carusoe, where you made the case out of some sort of non aerosole foam, and its running a webserver soon to be slashdotted.
Mod point free since 2001
Let me preface that not all Linux or OSS users are total nitwits. I'm talking here of the OSS people who evangelize and generally annoy us along with similar zealots in the Macintosh and Windows camps when it comes to boycotts and pissy attitudes to the businesses that dare cater to "lesser" operating systems (in terms of market share).
If one thing never seems to get through a zealot's head, it's this: Never piss off the people you protest if you want something from them.
Case in point: Mac OS X is essentially BSD, and these users will be able to play the new game at the same time as Windows users. Further: Blizzard knows code, and could easily adapt the Mac OS X for a Linux port. They have proven this with the Diablo II game, of which a Mac version was in stores less than 4 weeks after the Windows version, and even created a version of Diablo II that works natively in Mac OS X. Other companies that love to port, such as Aspyr, could possibly be convinced to license other company's code for porting to Linux as well.
However, certain factions, namely the Linux zealots eager to boycott and bitch and try to steal intellectual property and server code and processes they DON'T OWN are rocking the damn boat for the majority of Linux/non-Windows/non-Mac people who wouldn't mind a Blizzard game.
Don't get me wrong. Protesting is OK. Comments are OK. Being a whiny bastard only annoys those who can help you--namely the people who write the software. I've personally watched the news where some whiny Mac idiot almost singlehandedly fucked us all in the Mac world when trying to gain support or software by writing a libelous, fact-lacking, and generally pin-headed letter that only Pat Robertson would appreciate.
Keep your principles and write nice letters of request for Blizzard. Battle.net is still free for those who buy the software. Battle.net would get stronger for Linux users if the shills would shut the fuck up so that the calm, pleasant requests for support can be heard.
Blizzard CAN write a Linux version of all their products. If you don't want it, OK. But don't do an Al-Queda for the Linux gaming industry by protesting and threatening and screwing around with other's toys (like the bnetd guys are) so much that your actions sabotage a chance at a positive action.
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
You mean people who posses unauthorised copies of the game. "Piracy" has to do with armed theft of tangable goods (often involving murder, rape, and other nasty business).
Shut the fuck up! I'm so sick of people's dumbass comments and semantics. As I'm sure you're aware, in practice, language evolves and some words gain new meaning. Does whether or not we should call illegally copying software "piracy" matter?
It has nothing whatsoever to do with sharing fun or useful software with your friends
Sharing? How about next time you park in the parking lot, someone "shares" your car and takes it to the local chop shop to "share" the parts with others. Or someone sticks you up on the street, takes out your wallet and forces you to "share" your money with him. Copying software illegally is THEFT, whether or not that person would have gone out and paid for a copy on his own accord.
There is nothing morally wrong with this activity in and of itself, only the economic argument that some unpaid copies might have been paid copies otherwise.
Oh, sure. I suppose it depends on your morals, but as far as I know, theft is morally wrong to most people. Just because you aren't physically taking software off the shelf of a store, or taking dollar bills out of a company's bank, doesn't make it less of a theft, and definitely doesn't make it morally right. Give me a break!
Mark
It sounds like a fun game.
I would like buy it when it is released July 3rd.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
When a game goes gold, it means that the dupers have gotten the master copy and are already duping and packaging the game. Typically games are in stores between 2-7 after agame has gone gold. So early July would be incorrect. More likely around Tues of next week. Unless they went with a crummy duper.
Below, like, is my machine ;-). Ok my CD-ROM is faster ;-)
Windows® 98/ME/2000/XP:
400 MHz Pentium II or equivalent
128 MB of RAM
8 MB 3D video card (TNT, i810, Voodoo 3, Rage 128 equivalent or better) with DirectX® 8.1 support
700 MB HD space
4X CD-ROM drive
Macintosh® OS 9.0 or higher/ Mac OS X 10.1.3. or higher:
400 MHz G3 processor
128 MB of RAM
16 MB ATI Technologies or nVidia chipset 3D video card
700 MB HD space
4X CD-ROM drive
Recommended:
600 MHz processor
256 MB of RAM
32 MB 3D video card
DirectX® 8.1 compatible sound card
So close and yet so far from the world's perfect ID number
The real Seth Finkelstein has slashdot uid #90154
The name is also a subtle misspelling
My name is Seth Finkelstein, the troll is using the name Seth Finklestein
I did not post the above message in this thread. I have enough troubles without troll imposters.
Thought this message is posted anonymously, I will attest to it and verify it if needed. Other message posted by similar-looking accounts, or not attested, are frauds. - Seth Finkelstein, uid#90154
As far as I can tell only one person would make that mistake.
So many people miss the point about Blizzard's suit. They think Blizzard is justified because the games and BattleNet are Blizzard property.
Wake Up! bnetd doesn't modify or copy any Blizzard game. It doesn't copy any BattleNet code or use any Blizzard servers. All it does is implement, and add features to, a protocol which was legally reverse engineered. This is called innovation.
What Blizzard is trying to do is destroy two keystones of innovation - the legality of reverse engineering and the principle of compatibility/interoperability. If Blizzard wins this suit it will set a precedent that all protocols are the property of their creators, reverse engineering becomes illegal and interoperability becomes a thing of the past.
If Blizzard wins, what's next? Microsoft suing OpenOffice/StarOffice because they reverse engineered Microsoft's file formats? Intel suing AMD for reverse engineering and implementing some new CPU instruction? What would stop someone from creating a new extension to html and suing anyone who makes a compatible browser? If Blizzard wins it could happen!
I have bought and played most Blizzard games to date, but I can't let Blizzard's actions pass here. I am going to pass on this game and I am going to tell Blizzard why.
From the article: With record-breaking initial orders of 4.5 million copies, the game will be available at retail outlets worldwide in multiple languages beginning on July 3, 2002.
Do what you want, with 4.5 million pre orders, they are sitting pretty.
A linux users group boycotting Blizzard games is like Billy boy boycotting linux. Lol
IOException - Can't Speak
"The sun's not yellow. It's chicken."
One of the reasons that I became a lawyer was to avoid ever having to hire one. -SPYvSPY
Things are not "worth" what you put into them. That is a well established economical fact. If you put 1 million into a software project, the results will not be "worth" 1 million. The real "worth" of all the stuff in the box is how much people are ready to pay for it. If Blizzard can't find custumers who are ready to pay more than 10$ for the package, the the package is only worth 10 dollars.
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
Eh, bnetd issues aside, this game gets extremely boring after a few weeks of multiplayer. I don't plan on buying it just for that reason. I'll stick to Counter-Strike... which for some reason doesn't lose its luster for me.
A number of people are (in my opinion) being foolish and treating Blizzard, or Havas, like some horrible megacorporation that kicks puppies for fun and pursues legal action only out of sheer greed. To determine whether or not Blizzard is actually doing something wrong, I'd like some answers based on tangible facts. So, if you'd please:
1. Could BNetD have even technically included CD key-checking and otherwise verifying that the users had legit copies?
2. If the answer to #1 is "yes," did the BNetD developer(s) actively take steps to make those checks that WOULDN'T potentially allow for cracks that would bypass those checks on BNetD servers (by exposing how the key checks are made)?
3. People here are talking about how it's Blizzard's fault for this happening, since they hadn't encrypted their Battle.net code in such a way as to make it impossible to reverse-engineer (or to do so legally). Is this not hypocrisy for open-source fans (presumably) to demand a company to close off their code yet further, in order to prevent open-source people from accessing their code without permission?
Honestly - with #3 it's like a thief suing the victims of his robbery for not making the house secure enough. If you want Blizzard to open-source parts of their code, then say as much. Don't accuse them of being hostile to the community and then promptly suggest that the solution is to shut off access to the community. Either ask for greater access, or admit that Blizzard isn't really being hostile (or as hostile as you thought)!
That is not a fair comparison. As a rule, making infringing copies of software requires access to the original. So this is isn't a case of someone random trying to "share" my car or my wallet without my permission. This is my chosing to make something of mine available to others to copy. A better (but less realistic) example would be if I could put my car on the street and invited anyone who wandered by to push a button to create an instant copy. Strangers and friends would be able to get a nice car, and I'd get to keep my original. Totally different. With theft you have taken something from me and I no longer have it. With copyright infringement, I still have my original to enjoy.
Now there are arguments against copyright infringement, most importantly that you make it much harder to fund the creation of new works, but it's a totally different situation.
By labelling copyright infringement as theft, you are make these two very different situations appear to be equally bad. They are not, it's important to keep them different. Labelling it piracy is worse. If people are thinking about copyright laws in the sense of theft and piracy, we're unable to have intelligent discussions about the future of copyright. By demanding a more careful usage of the terms, people hope to keep the two distinct.
Horrid game, icky multiplayer, yuuuck. The game timing is all off, there is NO endgame to it at all, Blizzard pretty much set it up so that you HAVE TO rush. :( :( :(
On their forums when people complained about this they (Blizzard) just told the players that they 'weren't doing it right' which is a pretty f*cked up attitude to have about a game. . . .
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
the US copyright laws ensure that an author (not someone else) gets the exclusive right to decide how his works are used. if you take it upon yourself to distribute copyrighted works, you deprive the author of the only thing the copyright laws give him.
-c
I have discovered a truly remarkable proof which this margin is too small to contain.
Thanks to guys like him, they've already got Q2 working on the PS2 Linux kit. Slowly, but it works.
Let's try this again, but with the proper formatting to make it clearer...
Lots of companies make accessories that only work with this or that brand of something.
Such as? Can you name at least one company that makes accessories specifically for one other company's product that does not have a licence agreement with that other company? And try to use non-software examples, since they're really at the center of these disagreements.
Blizzard doesn't have a patent on the Battle.net protocol. Maybe you should actually read the complaint [bnetd.org] against bnetd before spouting off.
The person citing this example was comparing the copyright issues of Blizzard with the patent issues of mechanical parts. Once I stated why this point of view was wrong for patents, I assumed that people would be able to make the jump back to comparable copyright issues.
A better analogy would be writing an all new script with a similar plot, then yes, Lucas would have no case.
No, he would still have a case. Let's say that instead of the same script, a new script was written to tell the same story, start to finish, but from the standpoint of other characters in the scenes. You're still telling the same story, the one owned by Lucas. "Troops" and other fan movies overcome this because they are telling their own stories. They may be set in the Star Wars universe, but they are not trying to retell Lucas's story
Why do you want a game that plays for you to watch when you can be playing and competing on your own level?
Two words: potty break.
Two more: Progress Quest.
Will I retire or break 10K?
TheViffer is right. As a beta tester, I played for two hours and never came back, Sure, there's some neat spells, some (apparently) neutral treasure up for the taking which can be used to help your side, but it's the same old peons chopping down trees and mining for ore, then building more advanced structures to turn out more advanced units.
I'm not going to buy this game.
You're deriving value from a product you didn't pay for.
I didn't pay for the wheel and axle, yet I derive value from it. I didn't pay for a Bach composition, yet I derive value from it. Did I steal that invention or that musical work?
How is it different from, say, stealing a book?
Stealing a book derives the original owner of the book. Making a copy of the book, on the other hand, deprives nobody, especially if the author has already received a substantial return on the investment of time and effort put into writing the book. Assuming copyright law when making a case for copyright law is called "begging the question."
but if you try to convince yourself it's not stealing, then you're only fooling yourself.
Larceny and copyright infringement are considered separate crimes under the United States Code and the laws of the individual states.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Nintendo ... will sue anyone who tries to release 'unlicensed' software for their platforms
But if the defendant has the resources to mount a defense (for example, if the EFF picks up on the legal defense), Nintendo will lose handily because of the Sega v. Accolade precedent. This will be easier on the Game Boy Advance platform where the protection lies merely in the presence of 156 bytes of logo data.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Ok, I agree that blizzard handled the bnetd thing very poorly. I was just as disappointed in them as everyone else. But, blizzard has in my opinion, always been the guys doing certain things right in gaming.
Take Warcraft II for example (the first Blizzard game I played). Most networked games at the time required you to buy a copy for each machine that wanted to play. WC2 let you spawn copies though so that you only had to have 1 license for ever 3 people or so. Good move, and very gracious of them to not be so greedy as most.
Another thing that makes me mad is the mmorpg's of late that want me to pay $50 bucks for a game, then pay another $10/month to play it online (which is the only option for playing it). Considering that I probably won't have more than a few hours a month to play, I'm certainly never going to pay a monthly fee. I'll pay for the game but if I have to pay to use a product I already bought... that's just wrong. With Blizzards games, you can connect to battlenet without having to pay a monthly fee.
Personally, I think they are doing a lot of things right and I'm still hoping they'll come around on the bnetd issue. I've seen a lot of great games from them though and hope to see a lot more so I'll support Blizzard.
Easy. It's because I have enjoyed playing blizzard games, their license is better than most gaming companies, and finally they do the things that most software companies should be doing, but aren;t (i.e. releasing software only after sufficient testing -> delays are no big deal when I get my warcraft 3 box cuz I know that it's gonna work, and it's gonna work good).
So, to all those who don't want to buy it because of the bnetd thing...fine...for those who want to enjoy a good piece of game...buy it, and support one of this centuries leading pioneers in the digital storytelling revolution.
Hmm, seems to me that spending $65 on the WarCraft 2 Graphics Upgrade Pack would be like buying an expensive gift for a way-too-spolied child. Let's think about this for a minute. A company offers a product, gives us a date for it, lists a ton of features. Sounds like a good deal. Until they start pushing the date back. Still no big deal. Then they start cutting features...like mad. Now if this was any other company, we'd all be panning their product and despising him, but for some reason everyone LOVES Blizzard for it
I read earlier in this list of posts "I don't think anyone would argue that Blizzard makes good games" (paraphrased, but something to that effect). I am standing up right here and preparing to argue it soundly. This is not a troll, it's a statement of belief. Warcraft 2 was a great game. Since that point, Starcraft, Diablo 2, and WarCraft 3 (based on my experiances with the beta) have been simply TERRIBLE games. Buggy, unbalanced, uninteresting, lacking strategic or tactical depth (in the cases of StarCraft and WC3), using cheap workarounds to fix fundimental game flaws (i.e. Hey, if we let them only select a limited # of units at once, noone can rush right? right?), and always ALWAYS falling far short of the grand feature-scapes originally planned for them. Why would I want to play StarCraft or WarCraft 3 when I could play larger, richer games with far more depth (ohh...say...Total Annihilation comes to mind).
Now, to be fair, these comments relate to WarCraft 3 only through my experiance with the beta version. I honestly do not know if the game has changed since then, and if it has my opinions might change as well. But here is what I saw. The game was very pretty, it looks quite nice. However, the game mechanic hasn't changed or evolved at all since WC2. Same extremely limited unit selection, same "rock-paper-scissors" unit balance that makes "strategy" equal to "Just build some of each and run at each other". The "Hero" units were unimpressive and seemed to only be more powerful normal units that could somehow use Town Portal. The "Unaligned NPCs" were just weak units you killed to get at some resources. Games were fast and pointless, the races were unbalanced at that point, there was no strategy at all as you could never have enough units to enact a given strategy.
Maybe TA has spoiled me. I'm used to massive 2000-unit battles where you actually USE all 9 unit hotkeys, feint and probe, battle across a massive map. Strategy and production were vital tools as you pushed forward to conquer territory. Admittedly, maybe such things aren't everyone's cup of tea. But I don't understand how the RTS genre has remained the exact same game since the original C+C. Many people have tried to innovate somewhat, but where's the evolution? Shouldn't we demand MORE instead of eating up what's only vaguely satisfactory??
Blizzard has received about 4.5 million preorders for Warcraft III. I hate to rain on the parade, but even if every slashdot user boycotted, it wouldn't make a damn bit of a difference. The game has already sold 4-5 times more copies than most ever do, and it's not even in stores yet. So good luck with that boycott thing, I'll be playing it when it comes out.
Blizzard needs to put serious pressure on Vivendi about these lawsuits. Or, at least, don't buy until it drops to, oh, $30. Its priced way to high anyway and Blizzard has not done much new with this game anyway.
It would be truly bizarre if our eyes perceived light from our Sun as anything but white.
The problem here is that you have two definitons of white:
Contains equal amounts of all colors (objective)
Appears "neutral" to human eyes (subjective)
Certainly the sun is white by the second definition. That doesn't mean it's also white by the first definition.
-- Brian
The most rabid believers in American Exceptionalism are the exact same people whose policies are destroying it.
Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game.
Hey Michael, shut your fucking piehole.
Thanks.
First, comparing bnetd developers to Al-Qaeda terrorists pretty much puts you on the losing side of Godwin's law.
Blizzard's harrassment of the bnetd project has nothing to do with Linux or open source. It's an abuse of the legal system. Likewise, Adobe's abuse of the DMCA should offend you, even if you're not interested in cracking eBooks.
gamecopyworld.com should have a crack for it the day its released. If a company assumes everyone pirates their software, go ahead and do it. I never did like their shite anyway, as I am more of a capcom fan.
shoryuken!
Was it Blizzard, the same people that sued Bnetd, or was it Blizzard's Programmers? Really, think about the difference. Refusing to buy W3 would be like refusing to buy a book by your favorite author because his publishing company did something stupid.
There's a resonable chance that the people that MADE the game, and I mean really made it, are just as annoyed about the whole thing as you are.
Remember the tooth!
Well, there are more, but that's 18 games right there that didn't bankrupt their creators by allowing people to run servers at a LAN party.
/. crowd, I don't think Blizzard is too happy about losing 90% of their sales (assuming WC3 gets pirated at 2/3'rds the rate of the Dynamix figures) so that Joe Slashdot can meet up with his friends in an empty room rather than in Battle.Net.)
Well, actually, Dynamix *did* go bankrupt, partly due to the fact that virtually no-one actually bought Tribes 1. Why? Because people didn't need CD checks to play online, so they just warez'd it and played.
I remember talking to one of the ex-Dynamix staff, and they were saying that the figures for pirated people playing through their master server vs legal copies was something like 15-to-1.
Also, quite a few titles in that list *do* have centralised key auth'ing systems. Half-Life has WONID's based off serials, Tribes 2 did, Quake 3 did, and MoH:AA did. I don't think you can seriously count Doom and Duke Nukem 3D, since they were pre-internet gaming.
So before you go "Hey, it's not going to bankrupt them", it does.
(and as a side note: I'm going against the flow and supporting Blizzard here. It doesn't matter if bnetd heals a dying swan and fixes every bug in the game, it still gets around CD protection.
While that might be fine for the "Any use of the DMCA is evil, even if it means shooting off our feet"
... but up here in Canada we've had an ad in the local newspaper for a store which advertised Warcraft 3 with the cluebook coming out on July 3rd. It was about time Blizzard made it official, since it's been known for a week that it was going to ship soon.
If you like Warcraft be sure to check out Warlords Battlecry II another great Fantasy RTS.
:-)
s battlecry2.com/c /
12 playable sides.
Over 100 spells
Over 100 units
Persistent Heros levels 1-50 with many professions to choose from (ex. Deathknight, Archmage, Pyromancer, Necromancer, Paladin, Ranger, etc.)
Great AI with autocasting.
Tons of fun
This game is really a gem just doesn't get the sort of free publicity that the big game companies garnish.
http://www.ssg.com.au/wbc2/
http://www.warlord
http://www.strategyplanet.com/wb
SB
if you don't like bnet doing this, buying there game won't do anything bad. you'll just be playing a good game. that is ok for now as there aren't free alternatives to be better. so by bouycotting it, you won't have a bigger effect then making your own game. if i cared that much, then i'd start something by making free games that look as good as theirs does.
blizzard uses money to achieve their goals, that's fine but that's the way the money game is played.
if you use linux then you prob believe in free software. if you do, then either make a windows upgrade that will allow you to use microsoft code to achieve the gaming you want out of the operating system.
or make blizzard games in linux version. sure you'd have to be good to do either but if it means a heck of alot to you, perhaps learning the code to do it would work alot better then simply not buying it and not helping to give an alternative to people that can't choose something that is that good AND is free. most people simply don't have a back bone. make something that gives an easy alternative.
(or another thing i've always wanted was the rm,mpg,avi,qt and other movie codex to be in one install for a new movie player. and updating to view any media but anyways....)
kazaa right now gives an alternative for people that would rather use time, then money.
bt
I mean do slashdot editors and readers all believe that the moment something is written the authors immediately lose all rights to their creation? Is this just because intellectual property is intangible?
If a jewler created a great ring and someone took it, changed it a little, and sold it we'd call that theft. But if a programmer writes a progam and somebody decides to take it, modify it, stamp their name on it **EVEN IF THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR OBJECTS** then that's somehow OK?
Blizzard creates some AMAZING games but they're blizzard's game -- they're the product of blizard's vision and creativity and they have every right -- EVERY RIGHT, constitutionally protected no less and not by amendment either -- congress is MANDATED to protect their rights, to benefit from their work and vision).
If you don't want to play on battlenet then fine, don't buy blizard products. But it's incredibly stupid, shortsighted, and WRONG for people to believe that blizard is evil for defending it's intellectual property, something that wouldn't exist
Says who Blizzard does not make software that runs on Linux? They may not know it, but Starcraft runs fine on Wine!:-)
Blizzard are famed for pushing back release dates, but now that it has gone gold 3rd July looks a real possibility. My Life for the Horde
The whole "people were playing pirated copies on bnetd" was part of the original DMCA threat Blizzard made to get the website immediately shut down. This is no longer a part of the lawsuit, which is now just an ordinary copyright infringement case.
The current case centers around allegations of stolen code and other bogus arguments that Blizzard made up later when they realized that their DMCA angle wouldn't hold up.
The case is just an attempt to shut down independant 3rd party developers, and Blizzard's ever-mutating legal front practically confirms it.
As to the parent of this thread... yeah they make good games, but I'm sure as hell not buying from a company that tries to tell me what I can do with their software after I buy it.
MOHAA has been in the top 10 list since it came out in late January and it has no cd key checking. I would have preferred we'd had it, but the game seems to sell fine without it.
Then again I expect Warcraft3 will sell 4x more copies than MOHAA. That's what a lot of people are missing, aside from DOOM2, Halflife, and perhaps Quake2, PC games generally don't sell anywhere near as many copies as Blizzard games do. That's partially because of the amazing quality, and partially because of the good copy protection (no online mutliplayer without buying the game).
-*Avatar*-
I could give a flying fuck if WC III is open or closed source. I think it's cool that bnetd is open source, but even if it wasn't I'd be pissed at Blizzard.
You can have any sort of opinion you want about intellectual property and rights thereto, business methods, etc, etc. It has NOTHING to do with the bnetd case.
The simple fact is that Blizzard has no right to attempt to shut down a third-party product that interoperates with theirs.
If I make secret proprietary widgets and you make an open-source widget connector, I have no intellectual property rights being violated by you. Even if I make my own widget connector, I can neither sue you nor prevent consumers from buying/using your product.
Well, I guess I COULD sue you, and if I was big enough and rich enough I could probably outspend you in the courtroom and shut you down. But that's not really playing nice, is it?
Ahh, but I'm an evil soulless corporation and it is my sole duty to my shareholders to make as much money as possible and to hell with everything else, right?
The problem with Capitalism-Uber-Alles mentality is that it usually forgets the other half of the free market economy, the consumers.
As consumers in the computer gaming market, everyone in the Slashdot community has a sworn duty (or self-interest) in buying the best possible games at the best possible prices. And the price may not just be monetary. It could be a restriction on what else we may buy. If we don't like something, as consumers, we have the right not to buy it for whatever reason. It is our only source of power in the free market. If someone is selling a product that we feel is not in our best interest, for whatever reason, we have every right to not buy it. In fact, we should tell other consumers why we are not buying it so that they could re-evaluate whether or not they felt that the total cost was acceptable to their bottom line.
The Blizzard lawsuit, if successful, will damange the profitability of my corporate interest (Me, a Full-Liability Company). I am joining a cartel of other FLCs that seek to bring market pressure to prevent that from happening. I invite you to join us. If you don't want to, fine, but don't bitch to us that Blizzard has a free-market right to be an asshole, but we don't.
Similar to how the Nazis used the German legal system to persecute the Jews, where the open source developers are the Jews and Blizzard is the Nazis.
I Have been dreaming about this day for a LONG time, I have this and NWN pre-ordered I just hope its not a disappointment like Civi 3.
If a jewler created a great ring and someone took it, changed it a little, and sold it we'd call that theft. But if a programmer writes a progam and somebody decides to take it, modify it, stamp their name on it **EVEN IF THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR OBJECTS** then that's somehow OK?
:)
I think if you did a random study on Slashdot users you'd find that the same users who decry companies as "evil" for defending thier rights are the same ones who've never had something stolen in this way.
Then again, it's so un-American these days to think that personal rights apply to people other than yourself. Which naturally makes everyone evil because they want rights too.
A lot of people seem to think because Blizzard sues a certain company because of their copyrights and property; they can illegally copy the software.
... what costs them money as well.
Their developers did put their work in that game, design, programming, testing, their connectivity, marketing,
Next to that they might want to keep their keys private; on their servers only. If their server can retrieve the key of the remote user, why can't the other server retrieve (and store?).
Their keys are their protection...
They also have the full right to sue somebody who breaks the copyright law, use their code or get their keys.
It has of'course two sides, if they get their network to a pay-only version; people who buys the game want to play for free.
They might want to add a service that authenticates with their network to see if the key is valid and if not so the game doesn't work.
After that check it could connect to the network of your choice. A downside for them is that a game CAN be hacked and the check can be overridden by a simple patch.
You got to understand it's their property they want to protect. If they get to a pay-base network it would suck for the users, but if they do not and want you to use their own servers you cannot blame them for keeping their games as safe as possible for "warez-kiddies".
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
I know I'm going to get flamed to the pits of hell for saying this but I don't really see a problem with Blizzard running their CD check process off their own servers. It's their game and it's their way of cutting down on piracy. Being an avid gamer who sees people playing burned games all the time I can say that I believe their process works. I have yet to see someone playing a burned Blizzard game as opposed to the dozens of burned Half-Life CD's or Quake 3's I've seen. Besides last time I checked they could set up the multiplayer process however they wanted to. It's their game if they want to set it up that way it's their prerogative. While I don't believe that Blizzard should have pulled the DMCA card and all for better lag during multiplayer games I think that Blizzard does have the right to protect their bottom line and a platform that will allow unchecked usage of it's games will effect that. I really don't think that they will be the only ones to utilize this process in the future. Look at the MMORPG's (Star Wars Galaxies, Earth and Beyond, even Ultima Online) coming up, do you really think you will be able create your own server? No, you will have to log on. And every time you log on it will go through the exact same process that Bnet does right now.
I couldn't agree with you more. I keep reading that game companies already have more game ideas than they can use. Then why do they keep reusing the same old ones?
The game industry is still in its infancy, still discovering its medium. Gamers still ooh and aah at the latest 3-D engine out of Texas. Simple mechanics are still a differentiator among flight sims and driving games.
From time to time, PC Gamer publishes a list of the best games "of all time." Is anyone really still playing Duke Nukem, Doom, or Wing Commander? Does anyone play WarCraft, instead of its sequels? Strange, because movie sequels are lucky to be considered in the same league as the original.
Maybe we just have to wait out Moore's Law, but I think there will be opportunities for indie developers to show up the big game studios with a new idea, or two. I don't want to take anything away from the 99% perspiration of games like Half-Life and Max Payne. I just want to see that 1% inspiration show up a little more prominently.
They have a MacOSX version but no Linux version! That's a real laugh. Blizard (aka Sierra) has a real nack for avoiding Linux like the plauge. WarCraft III for me will be a no go until it's on Linux...the same can be said for many other Linux users even if it may work under wine.
I'll give you an example of why Blizzard and Sierra are so anti-Linux. You all remmember Loki right? Well a game they ported called Tribes2 for Linux will soon be worthless thanks to Sierra. Sierra updated the Tribes2 Windows client just a few months after Loki died and have refused to put out a dime for the Linux version of Tribes2. This means that countless Linux Tribes2 users will no longer be able to find servers or players to play with as they will not be able to connect to anyone with the new version. Thanks to this I would never buy anything from Blizard or Sierra....
Battle net is a FREEEE online gaming service, unlike all the other games outthere that requires a monthly fee to play online. For $60, you can get a great game and play online with millions of others whenever you like. Cheap games that charge monthly fees to play deserves to be hacked, blizz deserves their rights as a fair, quality gaming company.
Great Atrocit
It is too bad the boycott zealots can't get their reasoning straightened the fuck out. If you browse over the reactions to people supporting Blizzard suing the bnetd guys (or just not caring) you find varying reasons for the Blizzard bashing despite the authoritive use of the word "we". The first is an objection to Blizzard suing a group that is attempting to write software that is compatible with Blizzard's own software. A second group opposes the use of the DMCA to persecute somebody writing an implimentation of the BNet protocol. The third group is bitching about a lack of a Linux port which makes them just steaming mad. While I don't give a fuck about these people nor their respective causes I think more restraint ought to be used on the authoritive use of the word "we" when describing the problem with Blizzard. Your retarded qualm is not necessarily the same as other people's. Seek organization in your irrational bitching to make it more effective.
Blizzard has been making good games for a long time and the Vivendi/bnetd crap the great and wise M decided to point out has little to do with them making games. The Bnetd guys were making a program that people were going to use to play pirated copies of Warcraft 3. No one gives a shit if it was not designed for that purpose (which isn't a very strong argument), the fact it WOULD be used to play pirated games and it was open source which means a CD check could be removed is the reason it was attacked. Had bnetd been free but not open source I don't think such a hubbub would have been raised. It sucks Vivendi went after bnetd in some regards but not in others. It depends entirely on your point of view. Obviously I'm not up in arms about bnetd, I don't really care and I don't give a damn when people tell me I ought to for whatever their righteous and holy reason is. Go eat your organically grown food and wear your handwoven hemp clothing and don't bug me about buying a fucking video game because you think it anally rapes baby grey whales.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
- "one can use telescope to look at the sun only twice in a lifetime - with the left eye and with the right eye".
:)
I'm all for science experiments, but you've gotta know the limit, buddy
3.243F6A8885A308D313
I've got a garden full of corn and lettuce. I am deriving value without paying for it. Am I stealing?
Last year, I gave an ear of corn to my neighbor. He took the kernels off and planted his own garden. Now he is deriving value without paying. Is he stealing?
Deriving value without paying is not theft. The fact that I buy less corn and lettuce at IGA does not mean I stole from them. Theft is the seizing of someone else's property. If someone takes my car and drives it into a lake. They have stolen it, even though they did not derive value from it.
Suppose I take a picture of you walking down the street. I post it on a web site, which generates revenue through advertisements. I am deriving value from your picture without paying. Does that constitute theft? No! Suppose you then copy that picture and distribute it. Does that make you a thief? No, but it does make you a copyright infringer since I own the copyright on that picture.
The leard SDL programmer Sam Latinga is employed by them, so in a way if you buy this game you are supporting SDL. Not that it matters anyway; if all of the linux users didn't buy this game they would still sell a buttload of copies.
Sierra closed the dynamix shop, they didnt go bankrupt. Sierra is still in business last time I checked. Dont spread fud.
And for Tribes, Tribes 1 wasnt advertised like other games. You didnt read about tribes in the PC Mag or Game sites. It should of gotten more press, it was the "Cool" little majority game. It took them over a 2 years to get a demo out for people to play online.
WC3 has been pirated, the beta has been floating around the web, a new bnet version is already out that plays it online. Is that going to stop me from buying the game? No. I will buy the game, and still use a bnet. Just as I can buy DVDs and rip them, Buy cds and make mp3s. See the FUD, understand the FUD, but dont ever try to sell the FUD.
-
Now leave those nice RIAA people alone - little old lady somewhere in the USA
Hmmm...interesting question. To some degree - under the current laws - yes, the people who create something have little to no rights. The people who package and distribute it have all the power.
./'ers seem to want - no, nobody would have the right to profit from something that doesn't have a tangible counterpart. Write a game - anybody can give away copies, you have no right to profit from your labors. Strange that they're trying to argue themselves out of a paycheck. :P
Under the revised system most
I used to play a lot of rts games with my brothers and we liked to play with our own extra rules: we didn't attack eachother the first 45 minutes so we could all make pretty cool defense systems. Usually a harvesting unit would somehow end up to close to the enemies border, this would trigger some build-up agression which ended up at a total war after 30 minutes orso and a fight after the game ended, sometimes someone would shut off the computer when loosing the battle (computer: "it's just you and me now!").
Any of you people use your own extra rules with these kind of games?
because I bought WC1 and WC2, great games
When I was young my parents told me to clean up my room; I told them -1!
Roger That !
> So can you explain to me why Blizzard wouldn't just do a key check in the game client against a blizzard-owned key database, independant of server-finding mechanism?
Because the key is needed to authenticate the SESSION, not the client. If the client does the check, which party terminates the session if the key is bad? Are you suggesting a clientside check which goes "naanaa, not allowed to play" in case keyserver doesn't like the user? Ever heard of the so called trusted client issue and cracks? Whatever you suggest, if the game server where the playing happens doesn't do the check, it can merely be removed from the client code.
-- Matti Nikki
All of Blizzard's three original founders are still there.
There was signfificant turnover after Starcraft, but that's understandable after such a long hard game.
-*Avatar*-
That's exactly the point. Dynamix did not make enough money. If they did they would have stayed alive - nobody kills off the cash cow.
So, are you the one who got *.mit.edu k-lined from slashnet?
Slashdot community, please notice: I am looking for a girlfriend.
Nave H. Weiss