I'd be interested to know how many sales would be lost if you allowed one serial key to let two people play over a LAN. And only for the first unique serial key, so basically you get one person who can play without having the game in a LAN match (LAN only, not internet games). Kinda like the 'spawn' disks you used to get with games, that would allow one person to connect to a multiplayer game per person who had a full disk, but a little less generous since you could only have one extra person in any LAN game no matter how many unique keys. Surely this wouldn't make too much difference because anyone who really likes the game will buy it themselves, this just allows people to have a little more fun with one person who doesn't have the game. Like I know my brother might enjoy messing around with me in the game for a little while, but he isn't really into strategy games so it wouldn't be worth us buying another copy. I know this is asking something for nothing (and it isn't done anymore), but it would generate good will towards Stardock. I can't believe that many sales would be lost by something like this, but I wouldn't really know. Just some thoughts.

Except it's not nitpicking. The game doesn't have LAN support. Saying that it does is simply wrong. It's also interesting to note that when pressed, he started going to the piracy angle:

First of all, if the game really has no copy protection, then by definition it won't care if I'm installing it on two computers at once on the LAN. (In fact the game uses GOO, which is DRM by definition. Friendly DRM perhaps, but still DRM.)

This is where it gets ugly. People are concerned that they can't play on a LAN without Internet, and he throws out the piracy card.

SC2 doesn't require you to be online to play single player. It does require you to be online to play multiplayer... and so does Elemental. The difference is what, exactly?

And actually, I'm not so sure about Elemental anymore:

- Brad

If multiplayer can only work on Stardocks servers because that's where the game AI and XML are, how does single player work when offline?  So either this explanation is BS, or this is an online only game in single player too. Of course, there is no way to equate Ubi-style online only single player gaming with "no DRM", so I assume it's the former (though that might be a poor assumption all things considered).

Stardock's reputation was built on things like customer-friendly policies and the Gamer's bill of rights. So when instead of that we get no LAN support and flippant remarks about how it's a "non-issue" (when it clearly is an issue and has been for every game where this same change has been made), it's going to turn people off. Of course, we've been led to believe for a year that we'd have custom server support at release and we don't. The negative reaction is entirely expected.

Two.

I believe that's the idea Hermes. Your PC will do the calculations for the Single Player Campaign/Sandbox stuff... or perhaps I'm misunderstanding.

Sounds like your Trolling to me.

I think it is likely that singleplayer games would be run from your own computer, otherwise there would need to be internet access all the time with single player.  So I would say - single player games are run by own computer, MP run through Stardock servers, at least before LAN servers.

Best regards,
Steven.

Sorry, SC2 you have to be online to install it in the first place, and if you unplug the net, they give you a number to call to get the auth code to install the game...I don't think Elemental has that 'feature'.

Are you intentionally being dense? What part of client/server for multiplayer only do you not understand. Brad has stated many many times that the d/ling of .xml files for single player was for the BETA ONLY. Someone can take the gold version of the dvd, install it offline and never, ever have to sign online to play it or enter a serial # or anything, and install that version on as many computers as they like. Where is the DRM in that? 

Don't like having to cough up a valid login/key for multiplayer? Then yeah, your motives are suspect at that point. Pirates playing SP offline don't hurt Stardock's servers...Pirates able to play online does hurt their servers (and the rest of those who want to play online...see Demigod release). 

Also, the multiplayer game is a different one than the single player one...different features, different AI, etc. So the multiplayer AI is on Stardock's servers. Single player is on your local hard drive. There have been several discussions about modding the single player AI and where those .xml files are on the local hard drive. Did you not see them?

I don't remember where customer server support was promised at release (and I could be wrong, I simply don't remember reading it). I do remember that the emphasis was on the single player game, not the multiplayer one. I for one would be far more pissed off if they made me wait until the February date to play this game just so that you could have your custom LAN server. Your issues are a non-issue to the vast majority of us that aren't here for LAN play. 

Again, were I in charge you'd get that custom server support in December. Of 2013. From the new guy on the team, when he wasn't busy making my coffee or out getting lunch for the office. 

That seems to be the most rational explanation, but that's not what he said. He said the Stardock servers are required because the AI is on them and not in the game (hence the "how do you pirate that?" comment). But the AI has to be in the game otherwise single player needs to be online as well, so the pirate comment doesn't make any sense.

If all that's really missing is the ability for someone to act as a host, why not just say that instead of talking about things as if they're not in the game client?

Last year when asked, the answer on LAN was "almost certainly". That's where the belief that it'd support LAN came from.

You're bitching and moaning because Stardock have said they might make the game more awesome post-release. Seriously. Quit being dicks, everyone.

You know it won't have "OMG PROPER LANZ0RZ" at release and the boss of the company has said it's something they're looking into post-release. What more do you want?!

If you want the "proper" LAN option sooner rather than later then make sure you play the game and play multiplayer games and bring it up on the forums in wishlists and whatnot. If nobody much bothers with the MP or the requests for LAN play dry up post-release then it's a moot point.

And if you're not planning on buying it anyway then fuck off. Actual customer wishes take priority. I want pink ponies for my Sovereign to ride.

Yeah, my definition of LAN support is the standard one: can be played on a LAN.

It's the same one people used in the SC2 thread when bashing Blizzard. But now apparently we have a new one: Can be played on the Internet, including if people happen to be sharing the same Internet. That's not "LAN support" except in some redefined version where by LAN you mean "Internet".

But once it's installed, it plays just fine offline. Single time online activation isn't the same thing as "requires Internet access to play" ala Ubi.

Read the quote from Brad again, and this time take a minute to understand it. You can't say "how are they going to pirate it, write their own AI?" when the AI is in fact in the game. His entire point is that you can't do LAN play because you NEED Stardock's server to supply the AI.

If the AI is in fact in the client for single player, his argument is bullshit. What we're actually missing is just the ability to act as a server and host people. We're not missing AI, spellbooks, XML, or anything else he mentioned. So why bring it up at all?

What does piracy have to do with it? You can't play on a LAN unless it has Internet access. Piracy is being used as a way of marginalizing paying customers who are displeased that LAN play isn't supported (and neither are mods in multiplayer).

Different AI, really? What are you basing that on? Making up stuff doesn't count.

Mods are a pretty big feature of the game. Custom servers are required for modded multiplayer. It's been mentioned many times, and until very recently there was no indication at all that this wouldn't be supported at release. That's what lets me bring the Gamer's Bill of Rights into this, because how is it a "finished" game if one of the major features (modding) doesn't work at the same time as another feature (multiplayer) until sometime later in the future (maybe)?

If you were in charge, you'd be free to do that. I'd also be free to not buy games from your company, which is a right I'd choose to exercise.

I like how Frogboy never actually said "This game has LAN Support", and everyone is jumping on him as if he did. He just gave instructions on how to install the game easily on your networked machines so people could come over and play. Reading comprehension isn't that difficult, people.

However, this issue has developed momentum, whether or not it was a misunderstanding in the beginning.  It needs to be resolved somehow - not sure exactly how though.

What can be done now to resolve this issue, given what has already happened in this thread and the unlikelihood of any serious clarification being enough to satisfy the various parties involved?  Because we are as a community, and Stardock is too, hurting because of what has happened in this thread.

Best regards,
Steven.