|
On September 07 2010 02:22 Martijn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 18:00 Silver~Guy wrote:
Hello as a player I'd like to weigh in on this issue.
The lag issue is a problem and should not be ignored, if you want the best competitions you have ever seen, every second counts.
Cheating is a possible problem since game-sense and cheating are hard to distinguish.
Stress? Well, I don't know if that will be going away but we can at least mitigate it...
Ideally I think the future of streams should look like this:
[people in the game]
players
admin who video captures (who does not cast)
Admin (otherwise called 1st streamer) lags video by 2 minutes to a hub with a password.
Caster (otherwise called 2nd streamer) picks up the stream and recasts with audio to general public.
Spectators watch 2nd stream.
benefits:
-keeps game almost-live
-limits lag
-minimize the effectiveness of cheating
drawbacks:
-more coordination for admin/streamers/casters
The drawback will be dealt with by formalizing the process by which the admin and casters interact (which will naturally happen after an initial testing period).
About $250 a month per stream (more depending on bandwidth/hours online), plus an initial $400 investment. If you want to donate your winnings, we'll get right on that. Otherwise it's the casters/tournaments that would have to pay for this and you best believe we'd have no interest in sharing it with others and run our bill up higher. If casters would pay the bill, we'd have to start charging tournaments for coverage. If tournaments would pay the bill, it'd severely hurt the price-pool. Either every stream or every tournament would have to buy one of these hubs. And those costs are assuming that people would code the software for free. If the community wants to step up and start covering those costs, great, but realistically we'd be much better off with something like waaaghtv. Not to mention that you'd still have someone in the game potentially lagging, so in essence there's 0 difference between just having 1 or 2 casters in the game when it comes to that aspect.
Yes I'd like to know where these magic numbers of $250 and $400 are appearing.
Honestly I'm beginning to think that casting replays live might be the best way to things. I mean live is good, but if the players are not in a comfortable situation what can you do really?
As unfortunate as it is for the casters to not be able to cast it live, I do think that it's pretty selfish to ask players to play in unfavorable settings.
Yes I'm well aware that the money is put in to draw the big names, and gather the large amounts of people, but the casters need to respect the players perspective; do you not want a game that is being played to the fullest?
And for those saying that the fans will dwindle because it's not Live, again the example of HDH and KotB, two of the most popular tournaments were not casted live.
|
On September 07 2010 03:29 Frankon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 02:22 Martijn wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On September 06 2010 18:00 Silver~Guy wrote:
Hello as a player I'd like to weigh in on this issue.
The lag issue is a problem and should not be ignored, if you want the best competitions you have ever seen, every second counts.
Cheating is a possible problem since game-sense and cheating are hard to distinguish.
Stress? Well, I don't know if that will be going away but we can at least mitigate it...
Ideally I think the future of streams should look like this:
[people in the game]
players
admin who video captures (who does not cast)
Admin (otherwise called 1st streamer) lags video by 2 minutes to a hub with a password.
Caster (otherwise called 2nd streamer) picks up the stream and recasts with audio to general public.
Spectators watch 2nd stream.
benefits:
-keeps game almost-live
-limits lag
-minimize the effectiveness of cheating
drawbacks:
-more coordination for admin/streamers/casters
The drawback will be dealt with by formalizing the process by which the admin and casters interact (which will naturally happen after an initial testing period).
About $250 a month per stream (more depending on bandwidth/hours online), plus an initial $400 investment. If you want to donate your winnings, we'll get right on that. Otherwise it's the casters/tournaments that would have to pay for this and you best believe we'd have no interest in sharing it with others and run our bill up higher. If casters would pay the bill, we'd have to start charging tournaments for coverage. If tournaments would pay the bill, it'd severely hurt the price-pool. Either every stream or every tournament would have to buy one of these hubs. And those costs are assuming that people would code the software for free. If the community wants to step up and start covering those costs, great, but realistically we'd be much better off with something like waaaghtv. Not to mention that you'd still have someone in the game potentially lagging, so in essence there's 0 difference between just having 1 or 2 casters in the game when it comes to that aspect. so basically the problem is not the money but the software... The main problem would be a buffering of 5minutes of HD feed (being 5 minutes as a minimal). It couldnt be done in memory so throw in a 5TB++ of HDD as a buffer. The file size shouldnt be a problem. Only problem is that you cant get more than 10 minutes of delay... Well maybe using multiple temp files. Hmm i wonder how the hell ustream gets 2h vods.... Oh well. We need some programmer to write a program that: a) receive raw data from the streamer b) buffers the data on the HDD c) streams it to other streamer... Big problem would be that the material would be encoded 2 times so the quality would be lowered... Oh well maybe someone would figure it out
You'd just encode the video before storing it and you won't need more than 100MB of buffer.
|
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible.
|
On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible.
Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $.
|
On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $.
Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays.
|
8750 Posts
On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $.
Capture screen but don't stream it directly -- save it to a file on local disk. Second computer networked with first opens the file 30 mins later and streams it.
I just tested this with my PC and a laptop. It was as easy as I thought. vhscrcap + fmle saves an flv file to a folder that I'm sharing for streaming on my network. Laptop opens the file and has its own vhscrcap + fmle setup and streams VLC playing the file. You set the length of the delay by calculating the time between recording the file on the first PC and opening the file on the second PC.
|
On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays.
And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen).
|
sorry if it was said before, but you also have to keep in mind, that everybody can look up the results of the games (nearly) the instant they are finished on battle.net (if you know the ID) so keeping chat spoiler free would not be possible.
Having no chat would not be horrible, but to be honest it's sometimes quite funny to read it during the casts.
|
On September 07 2010 03:56 grigorin wrote:
sorry if it was said before, but you also have to keep in mind, that everybody can look up the results of the games (nearly) the instant they are finished on battle.net (if you know the ID) so keeping chat spoiler free would not be possible.
Having no chat would not be horrible, but to be honest it's sometimes quite funny to read it during the casts.
Yep I could not agree more. As mentioned before I had IdrA vs. NoNy spoiled for me during HDH cause of a comment left in the stream comments of someone who check NoNy's profile.
Also the ITL GP was spoiled by a player, and the day that had been spoiled had a 35% less viewership.
|
On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen).
....... in which case you have to cast the replays.
This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues.
EDIT: The point of running a tournament at the core of it is really to see which player is the best, it's the test of skill. Attracting viewers and shit like that is only an accessory of the tournament, if players refuse to play games because of these issues what then?
It's a biased case but the player's do have a foot and a leg advantage holding open the door on the issue.
|
I wouldn't mind if casters casted replays instead of live games. I do agree that having a ton of people in the game all with the potential to lag the game is absurd. Only the 2 players and an admin/referee/etc. should be present and then after the game is over the replay is sent to the casters asap.
|
On September 06 2010 20:32 xtfftc wrote:
There's a huge problem with casting from replays right after the games are played that people appear to be missing.
Let's say Game 1 lasts for 10 minutes. The caster receives the replay and starts casting immediately. Ten minutes later they check their email but apparently Game 2 is still going on, so there is an indefinite pause until the game is over.
Alternatively, you could send the replays after all games have finished but with a bo5 or bo7 this could mean waiting for a looooong time. SC2 is still a new game so most games tend to finish for about 10-15 minutes. However, (hopefully) this will change, so even 3 30 minute-long games plus bio breaks = 2 hours.
These delays will add-up during the course of the tournament. Finals are often played very late in the evening - imagine pushing the whole tournament for at least two additional hours? Making a reasonable schedule would become an even bigger nightmare then it already is. The only way to cope with it would be to cast pretty much the whole tournament the next day.
Excellent point.
Tell me, how many viewers will come back after watching 2 hours of "filler" and 2 hours of "actual gameplay" VS a live stream of 2 hours of solid gamplay?
Tell the result to the sponsors, and expect to see any prize money halved or worse, not supplied.
It's reasonable logic to say if Manchester United asked the spectator crowd to leave because "The noise affects my gameplay", "The crowd is biased towards the other team" etc they would NOT get the same cash. Same applies if they recorded the match and then put it on TV 2 hours later - less viewers compared to live.
Fact is - it just is NOT that exciting when its a replay. Try not to show this forums strong bias towards the players and think of the tournament as a whole. Viewers, Players, Sponsors, Casters. Without one of these 4 there would be no tournaments, or just very poor ones. Another solution needs to be found, and some posts have got close to a good answer.
Somehow having a 3 minute delay (however with a constant stream casted "live" by the caster") would be the ideal solution, maybe give or take a minute or two.
Somebody get on that - find a cheap solution that sponsor money can cover and everyone will have to be happy.
|
On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues.
Ugh let me repeat myself again.
98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney.
Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this.
|
On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this.
I completely understand the chance of spoilers, the problems of people not submitting replays, I've run a couple tourneys myself.
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
I get it, HuK didn't post replays, he's a lazy fuck or w.e. But if you try to reach a compromise, show respect to the player side, I'm sure you'll get it back. I personally have not had that big of a problem with people sending me replays in free tournaments, the occasional 1 or 2 sets where I had to ask someone but I really didn't think it was a problem.
|
On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong.
Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT.
Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers.
Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors.
|
On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
I completely understand the chance of spoilers, the problems of people not submitting replays, I've run a couple tourneys myself.
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
I get it, HuK didn't post replays, he's a lazy fuck or w.e. But if you try to reach a compromise, show respect to the player side, I'm sure you'll get it back. I personally have not had that big of a problem with people sending me replays in free tournaments, the occasional 1 or 2 sets where I had to ask someone but I really didn't think it was a problem.
Well without the viewers than these tournaments will not be for $. That's why companies sponsor them. For people to see their company name. I can be the very best Diablo II PvP player in the universe but if no one is watching me prove that than I will be doing it all for free, there would be no prize $. There is a mutual relationship, and unfortunately one where viewers > players.
Well in free tournaments you are mainly dealing with lower level players who are DYING to make their name. But with established pros they rarely do it, and even Day9 has commented on this before. Imagine running down 256 people for replays or 512......
|
On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this.
excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that
|
On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors.
Exactly.
SC2 wouldn't be nearly as valuable for sponsors if not for it's value as a spectator event.
1st and Ideally you want asses in seats, watching live, in the same room.
2nd you want live cast events.
3rd you have replays... maybe even fourth. I would rather listen to a live game than watch a replay to be honest.
|
On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that
I don't know what is going on with ESL so I will withdraw that point.
But I did have to ask you every single round for replays. You did send them but only after asking.
|
On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors.
So why did people run tournaments before corporate sponsorship? Before mass media so people could watch it?
I'm sorry but I think you're the one who has it wrong. A player will participate in a tournament because
he wants to prove himself. That's what a tournament is, competition. Entertainment is merely a by-product of it. Please try to understand, I mean what's a tournament with a $1 million dollar sponsorship but no players?
On September 07 2010 04:16 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
I completely understand the chance of spoilers, the problems of people not submitting replays, I've run a couple tourneys myself.
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
I get it, HuK didn't post replays, he's a lazy fuck or w.e. But if you try to reach a compromise, show respect to the player side, I'm sure you'll get it back. I personally have not had that big of a problem with people sending me replays in free tournaments, the occasional 1 or 2 sets where I had to ask someone but I really didn't think it was a problem. Well without the viewers than these tournaments will not be for $. That's why companies sponsor them. For people to see their company name. I can be the very best Diablo II PvP player in the universe but if no one is watching me prove that than I will be doing it all for free, there would be no prize $. There is a mutual relationship, and unfortunately one where viewers > players. Well in free tournaments you are mainly dealing with lower level players who are DYING to make their name. But with established pros they rarely do it, and even Day9 has commented on this before. Imagine running down 256 people for replays or 512......
I seriously doubt you'd want to cast 256 games live anyways.
I get that without viewership or sponsor, no money, but I'm still trying to press the matter that it is still ultimately the players who will decide wether or not they want to participate, money or no money. Obviously money attracts the better players, but again players are expressing the fact that they do not want to play in an environment with lag.
I mean with more money on the line doesn't it mean that the players should be catered so they can play at the fullest? So that lag isn't a problem, so that it's an even and fair match?
But really all we can do is speculate about what this issue will blow up to, I honestly think that it will come to casting replays if Blizzard doesn't do something.
On September 07 2010 04:23 Opinion wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors. Exactly. SC2 wouldn't be nearly as valuable for sponsors if not for it's value as a spectator event. 1st and Ideally you want asses in seats, watching live, in the same room. 2nd you want live cast events. 3rd you have replays... maybe even fourth. I would rather listen to a live game than watch a replay to be honest.
I seriously doubt you'd rather listen to a live game then watch it a pre-recorded game, I can say that with confidence.
Again money is something to DRAW in the players, players aren't meant to drawn in the money.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
