🚀 go-pugleaf

In message <570dd318$0$23320$b1db1813$6557...@news.astraweb.com> 
  | || ||| ||||| || | <|||||||||||||||||||||> wrote:
> On 12/04/2016 9:19 PM, Urbin wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:43:31 +0100, Catriona R wrote:
>>>   On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:29:11 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
>>> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <d0a705ed-3c6d-4667...@googlegroups.com>
>>>>   Shinnokxz <shin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> And that's that with Nostalrius. Too bad.
>>>>
>>>>> Though it appears the vanilla server community and outcry has reached
>>>>> levels it's never been before. Sooner or later Blizzard is going to
>>>>> have to breach the subject and offer something up.
>>>>
>>>> No they will not.
>>>>
>>>>> The shutdown was typical Blizzard show, but really pissed on the
>>>>> people looking for a reason to even bother with WoW anymore. I suspect
>>>>> when Legion is released and subscribers have reached an all time low
>>>>> post-xpac release, then Blizzard will consider giving it a whirl.
>>>>
>>>> No. That is never going to happen.
>>>
>>>   That's a pretty confident assertion, I don't think anyone can say
>>>   "never" with Blizzard.
>>
>> While that is true...
>>
>>>   Times change, and right now they're throwing away money by not offering a
>>>   service which would have interested a LOT of people
>>
>> ... but I am not convinced that operating vanilla servers would be
>> economically viable for them. I don't know the inner workings of Blizzard
>> but being a software developer I can tell you that at any company I have
>> ever worked at, it would have taken quite a lot of effort to revive a
>> software version of 10 years before. Apart from that effort, it would also
>> mean running the servers (and while a lot of that is certainly automated,
>> there is sure to be some human work required as well) and some kind of
>> support infrastructure.
>>
>> And 15k (or even 150k) players sounds like a lot, that would justify a
>> handful of servers and I doubt that the economies of scale would work for
>> that low a number.
>>
>> So even considering people would be willing to pay a full subscription to
>> play on vanilla servers, I am not sure it would pay.

> It doesn't have to cost them, people have demonstrated they are willing 
> to do it without their involvement. Really, they don't need any Blizzard 
> support at all :-).

No. Allowing third parties to run servers would endanger every Blizzard
Trademark and could also jeopardize their copyrights.

> All they need to do is establish some sort of mechanism so to play on 
> the 'Authorised but UNSUPPORTED BY BLIZZARD server'
> caps part of name :-)

It is not that simple, at all.

> you need a Warcraft account that is active, or maybe has been active in 
> the last 3 months. Money for stuff all effort, a tiny bit of handshake.

So this third party has to be able to authenticate against battle.net.

Oh, and you have to patch WoW 1.x to work with Battle.net, too.

-- 
Mister Teatime had a truly brilliant mind, but it was brilliant like a
fractured mirror, all marvelous facets and rainbows but, ultimately,
also something that was broken. --Hogfather