So far, it looks like that YouTube video hit ~30,000 views in a just a couple days after posting. =]
It's a classic "Blizzard Meeting" parody that's been done in the past, my favorite being the Fangtooth Paladin clip.
Other than that, on the side I've been busy collecting information on Blizzard's Next-Gen MMO. I have a few contacts at Blizzard and I've been putting together some pieces (it's not A LOT, but enough to get a good idea of what they have planned). It sounds pretty cool actually, but I'll have more details within the next few weeks I hope.

With the launch of SC2 early next week, I'm really looking forwards to one little thing that many have forgotten: Battle.net in-game ads.

I've been really curious how exactly they're going to pull it off. Of course, it probably won't be implemented right away so as not to spoil the beginner's experience - but you should see something implemented in the upcoming months.

In case you've forgotten (or weren't aware), in-game ads have been updated in Blizzard's TOU documents and Blizzard has hired Microsoft's Massive Inc. to delivery the advertisements. You'll see ads placed mostly on in-game posters, billboards, buildings, or really any texture.

DISCLOSURES; THIRD PARTY FEATURES. Massive Inc..

Blizzard's Games and the Service may incorporate technology of Massive Incorporated ("Massive"), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation ("Microsoft"), that enables in-game advertising, and the display of other similar in-game objects, which are downloaded temporarily to your personal computer and replaced during online game play. As part of this process, Massive may collect some information about the game and the advertisements delivered to you, as well as standard information that is sent when your personal computer or game console connects to the Internet including your Internet protocol (IP) address. Massive will use this information to transmit and measure in-game advertising, as well as to improve the products and services of Massive and its affiliates. None of the information collected by Massive will be used to identify you. For additional details regarding Massive's in-game advertising practices, please see Massive's In-Game Advertising privacy statement at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=122085&clcid=0x409. The trademarks and copyrighted material contained in all in-game advertising are the property of the respective owners. Portions of the Service are © 2008 Massive Incorporated. All rights reserved.

Note: A new advertising page is being created for BNet 2.0, but you can still see the old one at: http://classic.battle.net/advertising/advertising-info.aspx

When Rob Pardo first announced Blizzard's new directive (making more money from Battle.net), a lot of people were worried that he meant subscription based fees for SC2 and Diablo 3. However, Blizzard has promised that it is not their intention.

But Blizzard isn't exactly known for keeping their promises.

In World of Warcraft, for example, a lot of the promised content that was never implemented comes to mind. They also said that there would be no micro-transactions for World of Warcraft.

• 2008: "No microtransactions in World of Warcraft"
• 2009: "Blizzard Introduces Microtransactions"
• 2009: "Wow's Players Guide to microtransactions"

Regarding Diablo 3, Rob Pardo said in the interview: "Here's the way I would put it. We're definitely not looking at turning Diablo into a subscription based game."

That leaves it open to interpretation, in case they change their minds later. It's "corporate-speak", and you'll see that a lot of that same wording from gaming industry representatives:

• "We currently do not have any plans for.."
• "We're not looking at it right now.."
• "Presently, we have no plans to.."

Rockstar Games said the same about Red Dead Redemption for the PC. Guess we'll see..

Now personally, I don't think SC2 or Diablo 3 will be subscription based.. but Battle.Net might be, especially because of their new corporate direction and vision. The "free online versions" of SC2 and Diablo 3 will always be an available option, but BNet could incorporate subscription based fees for premium content and features (e.g. to make things more "convenient" for users like priority queuing or special access to events and competitions.)

Just like WoW, they're going to milk BNet for all it's worth.. virtual sales (micro-transactions), real sales (merchandising), and targeted advertising. I'm sure you'll see a Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 "store" in the future.. specialty pets, premium maps, customization of characters (paid name changes), special upgrades, or unit model changes. I can't wait to spend $25 to change my Terran unit armor from blue to red!

With the social networking features being added, it's going to significantly increase ad-targeting potential as well as increase sales (users inviting friends, promoting the game, etc.) It's funny how so many corporations are trying to cash in on each other's markets. Twitter wants to get into advertising, Google wants to be a social platform, Facebook wants to be a search engine, and Blizzard wants it all. (Blizzard's new social features are also being heavily incorporated into their "Next Gen MMO" but I'll talk about that later..)

Starcraft 2 LAN Play - Why was it really removed?

I often wonder if the monetization of BNet was the deciding factor in leaving LAN play out of Starcraft 2.

You see, when users are playing LAN Starcraft 2, there's really no purpose to being online - or should I say, that's a common belief. An internet connection might just get in the way of gameplay, so independent networks are created for small/medium LAN parties (30-50 people on one DSL will plug up the pipe and even be against ISP terms of service). Usually though, LAN parties will have internet access. But Blizzard can't take that chance! If users aren't connected to the internet, then they won't be receiving in-game advertisements.. all of that potential revenue lost.. it's completely unacceptable.

It's easier just to remove LAN play, save some money on development, and blame it on the classic piracy scapegoat.

Here was Blizzard's (Bob Colayco, Blizzard PR) official response regarding LAN play:

"We don't currently plan to support LAN play with StarCraft II, as we are building Battle.net to be the ideal destination for multiplayer gaming with StarCraft II and future Blizzard Entertainment games. While this was a difficult decision for us, we felt that moving away from LAN play and directing players to our upgraded Battle.net service was the best option to ensure a quality multiplayer experience with StarCraft II and safeguard against piracy."

Blizzard also said, "We want to make an online experience so good, that you won't want to have a LAN party." (Source)

So the reason for removing LAN play is because it doesn't fit in with the direction of BNet services (interesting.. like ad-targeting perhaps?), it will ENSURE a quality multiplayer experience, and it will safeguard against piracy.

* UPDATE: I've created a visual aid (Fair Use FTW)


But how can you have a "quality multiplayer experience" if you lose internet connectivity, are under heavy latency, Blizzard servers crash, or your ISP has issues? Can you ENSURE 100% uptime of servers and personal internet connections? Bottlenecking the users does not ensure quality.

Regarding piracy, there is no safeguard against piracy. (Unless it's a streaming game where no data is stored locally.) Every single game has been cracked and there has never been any method of "copy protection" that has actually "protected against copying." Copy protection is a myth.. there are "copy protection approaches" but that's it. In fact, removing copy protection measures actually makes it more convenient for the user and improves their gaming experience (case in point: No-CD cracks.)

If Blizzard doesn't implement a much-need feature, then someone ELSE will implement it.

Look at Kali for example, it filled a void because of a missing feature.

And then there's BNetD and PvPGN which are fully available (and open-source) BNet emulators that allow LAN play of Warcraft 2, Warcraft 3, Starcraft, Brood War, Diablo 1 and Diablo 2. There are thousands of BNet emulated servers out there providing the service that everyone wants.

Future versions (and probably alternative software) will support SC2 and Diablo 3. Blizzard knows this, there will be LAN play and they won't be the ones providing it.

History has proven that removing features to prevent piracy will actually increase piracy. Those who forget the past and all that.

(On a side note.. wouldn't it be funny if private BNet servers implemented their own in-game advertisements? WoW gold sellers would be a nice touch.)

* UPDATE:

Two months after that video was released, Bobby Kotick has now decided NOT to implement in-game advertisements into Starcraft 2. I guess they changed their minds after the massive uproar (just like mandatory Real ID).

"There was a time where we thought advertising and sponsorship was a big opportunity, but what we realized is our customers are paying $60 for a game or paying a monthly subscription fee and they don't really want to be barraged with sponsorship or advertising," Kotick explained.

They were fully intending to implement in-game ads, they had a relationship with Massive, Inc. all set, but now the plan has been cancelled, their Terms of Use has been revised again, and that new Battle.net (2.0) advertising page was pulled too. =]

Something very interesting just happened to me. And coincidentally enough, this also fits in with the ongoing Blizzard Series.

Back in 2006, I created a highly unusual and unique Gmail account that was used strictly for one of my WoW accounts (I own many). I didn't want any spam sent to the account, hence the reason for it's length and unique name.

Think something like: kaba23.blaaey.sphlnxtoo.blzzmain@gmail.com (This isn't the actual email address.)

The only place the email account name was ever "shared" was on my WoW Account. That was the entire purpose for the email address actually, for WoW only. The email address is not public, never used, and highly unique.

I should note that it's been 4 years now and I have never received even a single spam message on the Gmail account.

So here's what happened:

• I requested an automated password change from Battle.net (couldn't remember the WoW Login password).

• I logged into the Gmail account to reset the BNet password.

• I reactivated the old WoW account (which hasn't been active in 2.5 years mind you).

• Although I haven't received any spam messages in 4 years, I suddenly received one from a WoW Spammer approximately 3 hours after activating my WoW Account. I was shocked.

• This was all done from a very secure (and virtualized) PC and this is actually the very first WoW Spam message I've ever received on any of my Gmail accounts.

How on earth did they find me?

Is it possible that my email address was leaked by Blizzard (well, someone from Blizzard)? And why did I receive a spam message so quickly? Did I happen to request a password change at just the right time when transactions were being monitored?

One of the primary defenses that Blizzard supporters use (when questioned about internal account theft) is that GM/CS Forum Reps/etc do not ask for passwords, and that they do not have access to passwords and can only reset them.

I always get a chuckle whenever they use this defense.. mostly because their only exposure is to GMs/Support and they have no idea what goes on behind the curtain. GMs may not have access to passwords through their ugly-homegrown-support-interface, but they sure can see your email addresses or ask for them. Targeted WoW Account Phishing sure is a lot easier when you have a database of actual WoW users!

Sure, there are "security measures in place" for GMs/Support Users, but that same policy does not apply to the IT team, administrators, the policy creators, the CEO, and database admins who have raw access to account and billing information.

Are passwords actually encrypted at the database end? Consider this: the more complicated the encryption and security measures, the more time it takes to approve your password/account and login. How quickly can you login on a slow day? Also, certain email traffic isn't encrypted.. so it would be quite easy for an internal employee to sniff SMTP traffic for email addresses or intercept password reset URLs. Packet sniffing is monitored internally by the way, but there are always ways to avoid detection or at least capture. Some interesting things to think about.

On a related note, while digging through old Blizzard communications I came across some old work related to encryption that may interest you. A work colleague and I used to frequently discuss this topic and strategize new security methodologies. Right now he's doing some neat stuff that you should check out. Back around 2004-2005, I was on the hunt for a talented PHP coder to construct a web app built around a reputation system, where users could earn points much like Reddit. But, I wanted the points system to act as currency so that the users could trade or exchange the digital currency for merchandise. Security of the data was really important, and the site would need to reach a critical mass of users before ever being feasible however. Long story short, because it had to be decentralized, there was no way we would be able to do it through a website. We would need to potentially encrypt data amongst thousands of users so that records would be set in stone and ensure security of the points. Trust was paramount. I never ended up building the site, but a few months ago, he starting making some progress on the app thanks to some new stuff in peer-to-peer tech. He hacked some code together and has been working on an idea that we always wanted to do. It's like a P2P cash application and he explained in more detail here (it's only a few pages, and not a long read). If this interests you, you can download the latest 0.20 version here. Please note that this is still very early in development and buggy. But it's very cool to see this old idea some to fruition.

It's also interesting to note (while I'm on the subject of encryption and passwords) is that the reason GMs and Customer Support make a point that they'll "never ask for your account password" is because they already have FULL access to your account without your knowledge or permission. (As if your permission really matters though.)

It's actually quite common for a GM to login to your account to test issues, see if mods are interfering with your gameplay, or to fix problems while you're offline. So, if someone from Blizzard ever tells you that their employees don't have access to your account, that's completely untrue. They can login to and access it whenever they want.