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.

Comments

Please consider the fact...

[ObviousGuy]

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.

Re:Please consider the fact...

[tempest303]

First, Michael didn't disparage the game - I don't think anyone would refute that Blizzard makes good games.

Second, and more importantly, maybe YOU don't take boycotts seriously, but many others do.

Thridly, who's the "we" in slashdot? As if you could EVER get 100% of readers (hell, even 85%) to agree on anything?

Re:Please consider the fact...

[Sinistar2k]

Oh, but, wait! BattleNet checks keys! Maybe bnetd was invented so people with pirated copies of the game could play it without being hassled by the BattleNet servers?!

Have you spent any time at the bnetd.org site? Read about the conversations bnetd tried to have with Blizzard about incorporating a method by which to authenticate CDs? Read about how Blizzard said, "Nuh uh" and then sued bnetd?

Apparently not.

But lets look at all the games that have suffered by not having centralized key authentication systems that require the key for play (and I'm just going to list the ones I've owned and played in multiplayer):

Tribes 1-2, Mechwarrior 2-4, Quake 1-3, Doom 1-2, Duke Nukem 3D, Midtown Madness 1-2, Serious Sam 1-2, Medal of Honor: Allied Assault, Half-Life, Jedi Knight 2.

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. Admittedly, you can't set up public servers with Midtown Madness, but you can with the rest.

So what's keeping Blizzard from allowing people to set up their own servers? It must be assumed that people with pirated copies of the above games connect to public servers and play. Why hasn't there been a collapse of the game industry as a result?

... Maybe because enough legitimate copies are sold regardless to support those companies and that the extra sales due to widespread adoption of the multiplayer aspect makes up for the small losses to piracy. This is similar to Microsoft's approach - they hate piracy, but they know that without it, they'd be on a LOT fewer desktops. That's why the XP SP1 will merely disable future updates and won't shut down the OS itself - they can't afford to lose the numbers of users who have pirated XP.

Is Blizzard/Vivendi the first company to sue over server emulators? Naw, Ultima Online did the same thing. But I had already quit by the time that happened, so I didn't have much weight behind my protests.

Re:And?

[Lemmy Caution]

1. Slashdot, despite the "News for Nerds" subtitle, isn't a news site. The standards for tradition journalistic objectivity don't apply. And anyway,

2. it's questionable just how much they apply to traditional news outlets. Most newspapers and TV news shows are quite free with the editorializing, and usually far less honestly than above. And besides,

3. No specific course of action is advised by the comment. It's just an objective piece of information: a reminder that Blizzard is currently suing the authors of bnetd. Insofar as any product announcement implies an imperative to go out and buy the product (what, you think it's world news?) they are simply providing more information about the product - that the company making it is engaged in a lawsuit against open source developers.

Re:Oh no!

[TheMonkeyDepartment]

Hear, hear!

It is not in the Open Source community's best interest to try to strongarm or coerce companies to open their source (or to allow interoperability, or any other changes to their business model).

Blizzard (through Vivendi) is accountable to its shareholders. This means, as a corporation, they are legally obligated to protect their property and assets, and also obligated to select a tested, proven business model which represents a minimal risk and maximal chance of profit.

If you think Open Source is ALWAYS better than Proprietary, then why the hell is Blizzard's software so fucking good? Now that they've proven you wrong, the only way you can rectify the situation is by boycotting the software.

Great software should thrive. Blizzard makes great software. And they have the right to keep their systems open or closed as they see fit. Would it be cool if there was an open version available? Yes. I know there are several open RTS systems under construction on Sourceforge. They don't attempt interoperability with BattleNet, so there is no legal issue. And guess what? THEY ALL SUCK! They all look like derivative, amateurish, sloppy game systems. They lack the Blizzard polish.

And if you're a RTS player who decides not to buy WCIII because of this issue, well then, it sucks to be you!

Re:You're not serious- others may be different...

[Svartalf]

I didn't say they committed an offense by way of not doing a Linux version- not once in that message.

(Next time read the message more carefully before commenting...)

I just really don't have a desire to buy software for anything other than Linux. Now, as far as Loki's demise, it had less to do with a lack of market and more to do with pure mis-management (I know a lot of the goings on there while they were still in business- I've got more than a couple of online acquaintances that worked there and they said all kinds of things that map back to what's been said, etc.). Now, what I am saying is offensive is that they're suing the bnetd people, claiming infringement, etc.

That's bogus, they know it, but since they've got money and lawyers, they're going to try and beat down the little guy anyway. THAT is what I definitely won't be doing- paying for a corporate bully. I don't buy/use Disney stuff for the same reason.