|
On March 22 2011 01:40 goiflin wrote:Show nested quote +Blizzard sped up SC2. Movement/Unit responses/Game Play/Commands beyond brood war.
So when the battle.net lag kicks in, it reduces what they enhanced thus making the game at the "Normal Speed" in which it was intended to play at. They also intended SC1 to be played on normal speed. Does that mean that playing on fastest isn't good, or balanced? Hell no! It's much better than normal speed. Imagine how cool it would be to see pros play with no delay? It'd only be better!
You don't know what their intentions were lol, your making assumptions. Did you help craft the original starcraft? No, since your on TL debating with me.
|
WTF is with all of this talk about Game speed has a relation with Latency?
Just like Jinro said, LATENCY about the how long does it take for the game to REACT TO YOUR ACTION. The higher the latency, the longer it will take for your command to happen. REGARDLESS OF GAME SPEED, wtf.
JUST FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUEMENT. Let's say I had 1000 ping. It would take like 3 seconds for my command to take effect. Now, if I had 500 ping, it would take my command 1.5 second to take effect. That is Latency.
Game Speed is how just game speed. It will still take 3 seconds for the command to happen regardless of the game speed be fastest or slowest.
|
On March 22 2011 01:42 BlazeFury01 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 01:40 goiflin wrote:Blizzard sped up SC2. Movement/Unit responses/Game Play/Commands beyond brood war.
So when the battle.net lag kicks in, it reduces what they enhanced thus making the game at the "Normal Speed" in which it was intended to play at. They also intended SC1 to be played on normal speed. Does that mean that playing on fastest isn't good, or balanced? Hell no! It's much better than normal speed. Imagine how cool it would be to see pros play with no delay? It'd only be better! You don't know what their intentions were lol, your making assumptions. Did you help craft the original starcraft? No, since your on TL debating with me.
how about you stop baiting ,flaming people and doubleposting?
esp when your point makes no sense since latency has nothing to do with gamespeed in settings.
On March 22 2011 01:37 dakalro wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 01:31 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:On March 22 2011 01:23 dakalro wrote:On March 22 2011 01:11 GrackGyver wrote:
Blizzard wants the money from Esports, so they make Sc2 not a game that you buy and own, but a service that you buy the right to use on their property. That way, they can deny any up and coming Esports organisations that don't give them part of the revenue access to their service. It makes total sense from a purely business perspective.
But is it wrong from a business perspective to want to control a pipeline that has proven to have such a huge potential? Sure, they maybe didn't care much back when they were still just a good game development company, it was free publicity. But now they have turned into a big greedy corporation and have something they know can be a cash cow. Don't expect them to react favorably towards users when they lose nothing. Now organize a proper protest and maybe after that ... ofc thats sadly true in todays game business. but in this case this has more to it. its not blizzard that runs esports. its not even blizzard that makes sc2 such a huge success. its the community. and if they keep acting against our needs they will have to deal with constant shit they get evrywhere (be it forums or even something like sotg), pissed customers, complaints in forums and maybe hurt the game more then they expect. you can do such stuff with a COD where the attention span of the 15 year old fanboys is goldfish like anyways and where no real community exists since evry 6 to 12 months a new game comes out . but with starcraft its a different situation. and people will bitch about it or try find ways to circumvent it forever. Yes but the community will keep running esports because it attracts viewers and that means ads and that means $$ (community wants competition, sponsors want ads). Even with current shortcomings SC2 is still successful in spinning the esport wheel and as long as people will watch streams and possibly TV in the future it's gonna keep on spinning. Am going to assume that when the amount of money involved will grow a lot more and viewers will number in the hundreds of thousands Blizzard will provide special local battle.net servers. For now every nerd knows the internet is not infallible but when the average joe starts watching things should be a bit different.
blizzard wants esports since its HUGE advertising for them. esp now when more and more new people get into the scene its terrible for blizzard when community VIPs say blizzard is handling stuff shitty , tournament finals get 2 hours delayed etc.
now is the time to make new fans. but acting against the competive scene is not the way to do it.
|
On March 22 2011 01:42 aimaimaim wrote:
WTF is with all of this talk about Game speed has a relation with Latency?
Just like Jinro said, LATENCY about the how long does it take for the game to REACT TO YOUR ACTION. The higher the latency, the longer it will take for your command to happen. REGARDLESS OF GAME SPEED, wtf.
Are you not reading the post? In my earlier post, I covered that Blizzard made the game "FASTER" then the original StarCraft.
We're not talking about the "Game Speed Settings Here"
We're talking about the "PACE" of the game, unrelated to the game speed setting.
|
On March 22 2011 01:06 btlyger wrote:
I agree that they want to control how their game is presented in esports, but again, is that a bad thing?
I don't like how Blizzard "prefers" I play the game. I think that's the case with most people.
|
The ENHANCED PACE OF THE GAME + USING THE "FASTER" GAME SPEED SETTING + BATTLE.NET LAG = LAN Speed for SC2
|
On March 22 2011 01:33 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 01:06 btlyger wrote:On March 22 2011 00:56 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Please choose the server closest to your geographical location to ensure an optimal playing experience Yeah. But suddenly 12 years later the technology isnt there? No, it has nothing to do with that and everything to do with not wanting people to buy copies from cheaper regions -.- Its overall quite a joke. Man, they could just limit online sales based on region and then if someone wants to buy the game from China and pay for physical shipping, they can go ahead. Honestly, its a joke. Oh and of course the fact that they want full control of everything. I'm glad you at least pointed out the cheaper regions being the issue and not they want people to buy multiple copies. Granted that probably helps, but its probably more like you described it. However, I don't think them wanting to control their game is a bad thing, maybe it has some negative effects on us, but starcraft1 got out of control. All of the good players weren't playing on the network they made for the game, and instead were flocking to a network that didn't require a legal purchase of the game. Sure, most people owned sc1, but its still pretty ridiculous that they didn't have to. The fact that cross realm support isn't their is an annoyance sure, but it's really not a "joke". I hate when the player I'm facing lags because its a break in the game that usually won't occur otherwise. Yes, there are ways to make the connection between the us and asia pretty fast, but you still slow down the opponent, which if you remember was a huge problem in BW on BNET. On March 22 2011 01:03 Liquid`Jinro wrote:
And Im pretty sure its almost as much about control as its about piracy for LAN. Not of the masses, but of esports. I agree that they want to control how their game is presented in esports, but again, is that a bad thing? If I play on Europe from Korea, I will have huge delay but my opponent will not be affected. The problem with Blizzard being in control of esports is that they are completely incompetent and mired down completely in pointless bureaucracy before they can do anything about anything.
According to Prae.ThorZaIN's TSL interview, both players were affected? It's in the last question.
edit: nvm, apparently ThorZain is in EU so they both are not playing on their native servers.
|
On March 22 2011 01:45 BlazeFury01 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 01:42 aimaimaim wrote:
WTF is with all of this talk about Game speed has a relation with Latency?
Just like Jinro said, LATENCY about the how long does it take for the game to REACT TO YOUR ACTION. The higher the latency, the longer it will take for your command to happen. REGARDLESS OF GAME SPEED, wtf. Are you not reading the post? In my earlier post, I covered that Blizzard made the game "FASTER" then the original StarCraft.We're not talking about the "Game Speed Settings Here" We're talking about the "PACE" of the game, unrelated to the game speed setting.
You do know what you are talking about? Or you are just trolling ..
|
Sweden33723 Posts
... I am really trying but what you are saying just doesnt make sense. Its not like units in SC1 had a huge delay before they accepted their commands, so even if blizzard somehow made the response times of units better (like lets pretend they had a higher built in delay in SC1), changing the game speed would do absolutely nothing so I dont know why its brought up.
|
On March 22 2011 01:38 BlazeFury01 wrote:Show nested quote +
I was expecting a smart ass comment.
I was referring to the normal speed on sc2 + the server lag is = to the fastest speed on StarCraft Brood War.
While SC2 on Faster + Server lag is = to the Lan speed of SC BW.
Game speed is completely unrelated to latency... Latency in this case is how long it takes before your commands are recognized by the game Jinro, you don't get what I'm saying. Blizzard sped up SC2. Movement/Unit responses/Game Play/Commands beyond brood war. So when the battle.net lag kicks in, it reduces what they enhanced thus making the game at the "Normal Speed" in which it was intended to play at.
omfg you make my head hurt... don't pay attention to his "explanations"
"guys game is faster but lots of lag make it slower so it even out kk?"
|
On March 22 2011 01:48 aimaimaim wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 01:45 BlazeFury01 wrote:On March 22 2011 01:42 aimaimaim wrote:
WTF is with all of this talk about Game speed has a relation with Latency?
Just like Jinro said, LATENCY about the how long does it take for the game to REACT TO YOUR ACTION. The higher the latency, the longer it will take for your command to happen. REGARDLESS OF GAME SPEED, wtf. Are you not reading the post? In my earlier post, I covered that Blizzard made the game "FASTER" then the original StarCraft.We're not talking about the "Game Speed Settings Here" We're talking about the "PACE" of the game, unrelated to the game speed setting. You do know what you are talking about? Or you are just trolling ..
I know exactly what I'm talking about which is why I brought it up in the first place. Just because your having a hard time understanding what I'm saying doesn't make me a "troll" hahaha
|
On March 22 2011 01:50 shwick wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 01:38 BlazeFury01 wrote:
I was expecting a smart ass comment.
I was referring to the normal speed on sc2 + the server lag is = to the fastest speed on StarCraft Brood War.
While SC2 on Faster + Server lag is = to the Lan speed of SC BW.
Game speed is completely unrelated to latency... Latency in this case is how long it takes before your commands are recognized by the game Jinro, you don't get what I'm saying. Blizzard sped up SC2. Movement/Unit responses/Game Play/Commands beyond brood war. So when the battle.net lag kicks in, it reduces what they enhanced thus making the game at the "Normal Speed" in which it was intended to play at.
omfg you make my head hurt... don't pay attention to his "explanations"
"guys game is faster but lots of lag make it slower so it even out kk?"
[/QUOTE]
Yes, you've got the point. But, all I was doing was providing a break down for my explanation..
|
On March 22 2011 01:42 BlazeFury01 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 01:40 goiflin wrote:Blizzard sped up SC2. Movement/Unit responses/Game Play/Commands beyond brood war.
So when the battle.net lag kicks in, it reduces what they enhanced thus making the game at the "Normal Speed" in which it was intended to play at. They also intended SC1 to be played on normal speed. Does that mean that playing on fastest isn't good, or balanced? Hell no! It's much better than normal speed. Imagine how cool it would be to see pros play with no delay? It'd only be better! You don't know what their intentions were lol, your making assumptions. Did you help craft the original starcraft? No, since your on TL debating with me.
Default game speed on bnet ladders was fast for the longest time. Not fastest. Big difference between fast and normal, though, and I was mistaken on that account.
|
"guys game is faster but lots of lag make it slower so it even out kk?"
This was your point??
LATENCY is how much time it takes for your command to take effect. Even if you set it to Slowest in SC2 game speed. If you have 1000ping, the time it takes for your command to reach the game will still be the same, may it be Fastest speed or Slowest Speed.
|
On March 22 2011 01:49 Liquid`Jinro wrote:
... I am really trying but what you are saying just doesnt make sense. Its not like units in SC1 had a huge delay before they accepted their commands, so even if blizzard somehow made the response times of units better (like lets pretend they had a higher built in delay in SC1), changing the game speed would do absolutely nothing so I dont know why its brought up.
Dude, it would balance the game out. I'll say it one more time and use a different example.
Blizzard made SC2 2x faster the the original Starcraft (We're not talking about game speed settings here/We're talking about the original pace of the game)
Battle.net lag reduces SC2 to 1x speed thus making the responses "LAN NORMAL"...Why do you think marines and units can be microed at the pace their at?
|
8751 Posts
On March 22 2011 01:48 mmdmmd wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 01:33 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On March 22 2011 01:06 btlyger wrote:On March 22 2011 00:56 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Please choose the server closest to your geographical location to ensure an optimal playing experience Yeah. But suddenly 12 years later the technology isnt there? No, it has nothing to do with that and everything to do with not wanting people to buy copies from cheaper regions -.- Its overall quite a joke. Man, they could just limit online sales based on region and then if someone wants to buy the game from China and pay for physical shipping, they can go ahead. Honestly, its a joke. Oh and of course the fact that they want full control of everything. I'm glad you at least pointed out the cheaper regions being the issue and not they want people to buy multiple copies. Granted that probably helps, but its probably more like you described it. However, I don't think them wanting to control their game is a bad thing, maybe it has some negative effects on us, but starcraft1 got out of control. All of the good players weren't playing on the network they made for the game, and instead were flocking to a network that didn't require a legal purchase of the game. Sure, most people owned sc1, but its still pretty ridiculous that they didn't have to. The fact that cross realm support isn't their is an annoyance sure, but it's really not a "joke". I hate when the player I'm facing lags because its a break in the game that usually won't occur otherwise. Yes, there are ways to make the connection between the us and asia pretty fast, but you still slow down the opponent, which if you remember was a huge problem in BW on BNET. On March 22 2011 01:03 Liquid`Jinro wrote:
And Im pretty sure its almost as much about control as its about piracy for LAN. Not of the masses, but of esports. I agree that they want to control how their game is presented in esports, but again, is that a bad thing? If I play on Europe from Korea, I will have huge delay but my opponent will not be affected. The problem with Blizzard being in control of esports is that they are completely incompetent and mired down completely in pointless bureaucracy before they can do anything about anything. According to Prae.ThorZaIN's TSL interview, both players were affected? It's in the last question.
That's because EU vs KR games are played on NA every game.
NA vs KR and NA vs EU will switch servers throughout the series
The connection between EU and KR is so bad that it's better to have every game played on NA.
So it's like this:
If you live in NA, then connections to both KR and EU are playable, but cause a significant disadvantage.
If you live in KR, then connection to NA is playable, connection to EU is unplayable
If you live in EU, then connection to NA is playable, connection to KR is unplayable
So every match between KR and EU will have bothersome latency, but "fair" latency, in the sense that both players are playing with about the same latency. Certain strategies and units and tactics benefit more or less from good latency, but I'm not sure if we can conclude any disadvantages or advantages by increasing latency for both players. Certainly any player who never plays cross server and never experiences high latency will feel its effect more, so I expect Koreans to be bothered by playing on NA more than Europeans are, just because they never play on NA.
|
On March 22 2011 01:52 goiflin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 01:42 BlazeFury01 wrote:On March 22 2011 01:40 goiflin wrote:Blizzard sped up SC2. Movement/Unit responses/Game Play/Commands beyond brood war.
So when the battle.net lag kicks in, it reduces what they enhanced thus making the game at the "Normal Speed" in which it was intended to play at. They also intended SC1 to be played on normal speed. Does that mean that playing on fastest isn't good, or balanced? Hell no! It's much better than normal speed. Imagine how cool it would be to see pros play with no delay? It'd only be better! You don't know what their intentions were lol, your making assumptions. Did you help craft the original starcraft? No, since your on TL debating with me. Default game speed on bnet ladders was fast for the longest time. Not fastest. Big difference between fast and normal, though, and I was mistaken on that account.
Blizzard made the "faster speed" because fast speed + battle.net lag was really bad. So, they tried to balance out the speed by making another setting (Which still didn't work)
So this time, they enhanced the actual "pace" of the game. That way, if they we're to add another game speed the game would ultimately be faster...
|
On March 22 2011 01:55 BlazeFury01 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 01:49 Liquid`Jinro wrote:
... I am really trying but what you are saying just doesnt make sense. Its not like units in SC1 had a huge delay before they accepted their commands, so even if blizzard somehow made the response times of units better (like lets pretend they had a higher built in delay in SC1), changing the game speed would do absolutely nothing so I dont know why its brought up.
Dude, it would balance the game out. I'll say it one more time and use a different example. Blizzard made SC2 2x faster the the original Starcraft (We're not talking about game speed settings here/We're talking about the original pace of the game) Battle.net lag reduces SC2 to 1x speed thus making the responses "LAN NORMAL"...Why do you think marines and units can be microed at the pace their at?
BlazeFury, I'm sorry, but it is you who doesn't understand it. If this is your point, it's not valid. Latency has nothing to do with game speed (however you phrase it). Alle the other people in here are trying to tell you this.
Please sit back and think about their arguments for a second.
|
On March 22 2011 01:55 aimaimaim wrote:This was your point?? LATENCY is how much time it takes for your command to take effect. Even if you set it to Slowest in SC2 game speed. If you have 1000ping, the time it takes for your command to reach the game will still be the same, may it be Fastest speed or Slowest Speed.
This has absolutely NOTHING to do with Fastest or Slowest speed.
What I've been talking about this entire time is that blizzard made the commands/gameplay 2X Faster then the original starcraft.
That way, once battle.net lag kicks in the game will be at "LAN" speed because the commands will be reduced back to 1X in which the game was suppose to be played.
|
i think artificially increasing ping is def done sometimes, just look at the xbox 360 as an example, took a long time before hackers found out how to make xlink games work because of the artificial ping increase microsoft had put on it... blizzard def could have done the same thing, not saying they did, but it's def not a ridiculous idea as some state...
other than that i feel a few ppl here state the obvious by saying of course blizzard want control and decrease piracy, blizz has been doing so many things to get into control (see sc1 lawsuits) that i think it's hard to deny that that's not an issue for them... imo blizz just turned into a greedy company like all others and is nothing special anymore.. they are lucky that most ppl who dont know them so well (most ppl out there actually) still think of them as the holy grail >_<
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
