🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5f790s$8...@news.orst.edu>, Brett Barksdale
<br...@oce.orst.edu> writes
>In article <33156ecf...@news.alt.net> Spadge@in.yo.face (Spadge) writes:
>
>-Here's an obvious flaw that Blizzard has already mentioned themselves.
>-If player information was stored on the server, your player would be
>-invalidated as soon as you decided to play outside of Battle.net.  Any
>-upgrades or changes in weapons you made if you were to play a modem
>-game or over a local network would cause your character to be
>-unplayable on Battle.net because it doesn't match the server's data
>-anymore.   That means that your character is only good on Battle.net.
>-And I think most people would agree that that sucks.
>
>I doubt that very much. After watching all of the mad cheating and hacks 
>completely destroy the open gaming concept of b.net, I think most people
>would agree that it /wouldn't/ suck. 
>
>So /what/ if you can't move the same character from IPX games to b.net to
>whatever? That's a real small price to pay to make b.net nearly cheat-proof.
>And when you consider that most people wouldn't /bother/ with IPX or other
>non b.net multi-games if b.net was a good place to play, the loss of
>transferability isn't a problem at all.
>
>Frankly, right now Blizzard would offer up any excuse as to why they didn't
>save data on the b.net servers in light of the rampant cheating problem.
>They screwed up and they know it. Right now, it's password-protected games
>or bust on b.net.
>
re that bit about not being able to use ipx characters on a b.net game,
i can with no prblem what so ever.
Marmite the slayer of furry things.