I’ve been chatting away to a couple of 360-owning friends lately (in case you’ve forgotten, which you probably have, I’m first and foremost a PS3 owner) and we got into a heated discussion about network features. Well, I said that I had nothing against the 360 and quite enjoyed playing Warhawk, and they said Halo 3 was better despite the two games being sorta different and because the latter featured Local Area Network features..which Warhawk does anyway.
However, they did quickly pounce on the fact that Gears of War had LAN features too, and outside of multiplatform releases I was stumped. So the question is, are LAN features really as necessary as my 360-owning chums make out, or are they just a nice afterthought that you wont use? Jump time.
On PC games, I can understand that the concept of LAN gaming has been around for a long time and that LAN parties still go on on a regular basis these days: just look at events such as the recent QuakeCon and Ctrl+Alt+Del’s upcoming 2008 Digital Overload, which attract a whole heap of gamers each time they’re held. PCs and LAN gaming seem to go hand in hand and that’s just fine by me.
However, while I’m familiar with a couple of past attempts to make LAN gaming and consoles work together (example: Gran Turismo 4’s never-used-by-anyone LAN mode) I’ve been stuck in the mindset that the two just don’t mix. My two Halo-loving friends think differently: they seem to be keen on the occasional Master Chief LAN party or Cole-train network love-in. They’re also convinced that the PS3 will be utterly done for if it doesn’t get some more LAN-friendly games, and soon.
I’m not so sure about that. If the number of LAN-friendly games was proportional to the PS3’s success, then it wouldn’t be doing too well, and there’s hardly a gamer out there who wont agree that it’s slowly climbing up the popularity ladder after a pretty rough first year. With only Warhawk on the tip of my tongue when it comes to naming PS3-only LAN games (and only Halo 3 and Gears on my friends’ when they think of LAN games on the 360) I’m sure that there are more critical features out there.
If LAN was so critical to the success of a console, why bother setting up online infrastructures such as the PlayStation Network or Xbox Live anyway? Nobody’s going to use them since they’ll all be playing each other across local area networks, right? For most console owners, network gaming will automatically mean “across the internet” and I can’t see this idea changing at all: there wont be any time in the near future where the majority of console owners equate network gaming with LAN parties.
To me, LAN compatibility in games is simply a nice afterthought tacked on for those chosen few who feel that it’s a better alternative to gaming through an online infrastructure. It’s a niche feature reserved for the FPS-obsessed and nothing more.
Is a slightly smaller ping rate really worth making that big a deal about? Are LAN features really necessary for gaming consoles when internet gaming is really growing at a rate I can only describe as exponential (that is to say, up and up)? I don’t really think so, but that’s just me. What about you? Do you think LAN features are necessary? Do you use them a lot? The comment box is there..let me have it, guys.
![[Post to Twitter]](http://sarcasticgamer.com/wp/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/tweet-this-small.png)
Tweet This
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
13 responses so far ↓
1 Keith K // Sep 8, 2008 at 11:19 am
Maybe to all the little school kiddies living off their parents’ wallets who couldnt afford a PS3 in their wettest of dreams.
To actual people who live normal lives day in, day out.. Not. At. All.
2 Makidian // Sep 8, 2008 at 11:42 am
I can’t think of one person who uses the LAN feature on Warhawk. And why would you want to with the amount of players on PSN or XBL!? So you are right and they are not right, simple as that
3 gebus // Sep 8, 2008 at 11:51 am
LAN is awesome. Something happens to players when they are playing in the same location. The smack talk and competition just hits a new level.
I could play with my friends online but getting together at someones house is a great experience. My friends and I Play Halo (all of them) and Gears for the most part at our LAN’s but have also played Rock Band and GRAW at our parties.
4 NoneOfYourBusiness // Sep 8, 2008 at 11:55 am
But for consoles, when do you ever need to use LAN. Usually Multiplayer options are suffice, and if you want a big game go online.
5 peterocc // Sep 8, 2008 at 12:28 pm
YES, Local LAN play is crucial, especially to FPS/3PS games like COD4. That one feature (missing in COD4) is why the game is not on the MLG circuit. You can play it in a LAN, but without customizable classes… FAIL!
6 Monkeyboo2 // Sep 8, 2008 at 1:01 pm
LAN on consoles is the difference between becoming an MLG/tournament game and just being a highly competitive game.
There are good games which don’t have LAN (CoD4) because they make up for it with Gameplay and it will never be on the MLG circuit; which is a shame because it is my favourite game (currently).
And not being on the MLG circuit means that it has a slightly less competitive and less large community than it could do.
7 FlintSteelton // Sep 8, 2008 at 1:14 pm
I play LAN sometimes on various games with my roomate. It’s a nice feature to have, but not a make-or-break for the console. It’s fairly simple to implement if you have an online system. Just a few adjustments and you have network communication locally.
I’m not sure if you have something against LAN mode or if you were just pissed off at your 360 friends. There’s nothing wrong with having LAN, and including a feature like this has it’s place with certain games even if you yourself don’t use them. If you haven’t played a big LAN game you’re missing out on a fun, different experience.
As for PCs and LAN… if anything, the consoles are trying to imitate the best features from PC. So far this has been the online support, media capabilities, upgradable harddrives, and digital stores. LAN is one other feature which would make sense since consoles are easier to carry around with you, I find no problem with taking them over a friend’s house and using a spare TV.
8 Kevin // Sep 8, 2008 at 1:16 pm
I’m currently deployed overseas and ill tell you this, lan mode is VERY important. Soldiers on every base in the world play xbox360 networked. We have a basewide network here and run games of COD4 and Halo3 nearly every night with 20 or so people. US bases have much more. And ill tell you this, soldiers buy a LOT of video games.
9 kman571 // Sep 8, 2008 at 5:37 pm
@peterocc; Monkeyboo2
I don’t think COD4 is suffering from not being an MLG circuit title. As it has held the top ranking on Live for months and has combined sales of over 10 million copies. Plus who cares about pro gaming. Play a game because it’s what you like not because it’s what’s popular.
10 boringsupreez // Sep 9, 2008 at 12:19 am
I only ever use LAN on PC games.
11 Kurt // Sep 9, 2008 at 12:56 am
LAN is definitely a must. Besides playing versus, co-op on LAN is fun too. My friend and I play LAN when we get the chance for co-op since it’s easier to communicate. I only have experience with LAN using a 360, but Halo seems to be the only game company that focuses on LAN so much; it’s the only game that allows split screen over LAN. COD4, Gears, and RSV2 don’t support it.
12 long_skater // Sep 9, 2008 at 2:23 pm
i think LAN should be an additional feature but i dont think it is a nessacesty when it comes to consols and it shouldnt matter when debating the 2 consols anyways.
my 2 cents : why not add on a lan feature anyways!? to add to the reasoning to buy a game. it does give games an edge in the market.
13 Monkeyboo2 // Sep 10, 2008 at 2:06 pm
@kman571
It’s not necersarily ’suffering’ horribly as a result of not having LAN but it would have more community, more respect and more longlevity.
And it isn’t about playing what’s popular; its just that popular games is usually where the money is at.
Leave a Comment