| Forum Index > Closed |
|
urashimakt
United States1591 Posts
On April 09 2012 02:00 hzflank wrote: I guarantee that incorporating this into SC2 would take far less work than the 'Arcade' feature that is being added in patch 1.5. I suppose that's true...did you mean to quote me? That seemed unrelated. | ||
|
Mauldo
United States750 Posts
| ||
|
movitz
Sweden15 Posts
no point of discussing it here if blizzard never sees it | ||
|
hzflank
United Kingdom2991 Posts
| ||
|
chillpenguin
United States90 Posts
| ||
|
Xapti
Canada2473 Posts
On April 09 2012 02:02 Mauldo wrote: Do any of you know how hard it would be to do this? The coding alone must be horrendous, let alone determining the exact moment of disconnect, the exact moment that commands stopped coming in, and the exact state of everything on the fucking game map. The game's code is infinitely more complicated that Brood War, and all of these "Oh, well, it was in Brood War. Should be easy to implement" really shouldn't even be posted. Unless, of course, you're a computer programmer. Because I'm not, so any post from a legit programmer (RICH) telling me it's easy enough to do would be welcome. But the same rando-TL international business lawyers becoming rando-TL computer programmers is getting more than just a little old. no no no no no. It's not more complicated. SC2 is a more advanced game, but the systems haven't changed. Starcraft 2 uses replays exactly like brood war, and that's how you can save/load games — let alone other methods. (Brood war probably didn't use a replay system for save/load because replays didn't exist when the save/load first existed, but that doesn't mean the replay system couldn't be used for loading games) Even the standard non-replay method (which consists of of just counting all the units on the map, all the sprites, all the statuses of objects, all the statuses of statuses, etc.) exists in Starcraft 2 already, it's just only for Single Player. The disconnect time does not need to be known — the observer/player(s) just need to be able to save during or immediately after the disconnect. It's not an automatic system being implemented that would be used on the ladder or anything. It would be for specific cases where there's a 3rd party observer (or two trusted parties playing the game without a third party) to ensure there's no exploitation of the system | ||
|
eXePensai
Canada56 Posts
Well if any of you track any places like darkblizz and communities like that you'd know that there is a piece of software (which I will not name) that already exists, allowing people to play over lan and hamachi networks. People are already pirating starcarft 2 and playing in 'offline' communities. . . . the game and systems have been hacked wide open it's just that not everyone knows this.. | ||
|
StarcraftMan
Canada507 Posts
On April 09 2012 02:02 Mauldo wrote: Do any of you know how hard it would be to do this? The coding alone must be horrendous, let alone determining the exact moment of disconnect, the exact moment that commands stopped coming in, and the exact state of everything on the fucking game map. The game's code is infinitely more complicated that Brood War, and all of these "Oh, well, it was in Brood War. Should be easy to implement" really shouldn't even be posted. Unless, of course, you're a computer programmer. Because I'm not, so any post from a legit programmer (RICH) telling me it's easy enough to do would be welcome. But the same rando-TL international business lawyers becoming rando-TL computer programmers is getting more than just a little old. As a programmer, dumping the game state to a file should be straight forward and easy. If there is any tricky part, it's loading the game file for multiple players, observers, etc, so that the game can resume from its last state. This is something that only Blizzard programmers would know. | ||
|
kingcoyote
United States546 Posts
On April 09 2012 02:02 Mauldo wrote: Do any of you know how hard it would be to do this? The coding alone must be horrendous, let alone determining the exact moment of disconnect, the exact moment that commands stopped coming in, and the exact state of everything on the fucking game map. The game's code is infinitely more complicated that Brood War, and all of these "Oh, well, it was in Brood War. Should be easy to implement" really shouldn't even be posted. Unless, of course, you're a computer programmer. Because I'm not, so any post from a legit programmer (RICH) telling me it's easy enough to do would be welcome. But the same rando-TL international business lawyers becoming rando-TL computer programmers is getting more than just a little old. I am a computer programmer, and have been doing it professionally since 2006. The replay files are stored as a sequence of commands, I believe. If this is not true, then disregard everything else I say. But, if it is a sequence of commands (player A clicked here, player B pressed 'a'), then restoring from a partial save is possible with how the save file is structured. You just fast-forward / rewind the save to the point you want, and then hit resume and essentially fork the game. This same method could be used to take an existing replay and fork the game, which could make for some interesting training sessions (if I would have noticed this drop faster, could I have won? let's go re-play the game right before then and you stop the drop and see what happens). As far as how difficult it would be to implement in game, I can't say. Being a computer programmer doesn't tell you how they wrote their code. They could have some stuff in there that makes this harder than it should be. That's not at all uncommon. All I can say with reasonable certainty is that if the save file is stored as a timestamped list of player commands, and the game engine recreates the game from that data, then the save file format already supports restoring from a partial save very easily. | ||
|
branflakes14
2082 Posts
| ||
|
Xapti
Canada2473 Posts
On April 09 2012 02:14 branflakes14 wrote: Vote with your wallet then. It's pointless throwing a tantrum when you keep buying their games. That's not really the way to go about things. they're not the best analogies, but it's kinda like not voting or not paying taxes and expecting the government to improve. | ||
|
branflakes14
2082 Posts
On April 09 2012 02:16 Xapti wrote: That's not really the way to go about things. they're not the best analogies, but it's kinda like not voting or not paying taxes and expecting the government to improve. But what incentive does Blizzard have to change anything when people are still buying their games en masse? Not giving them money is the ONLY way they'll improve. | ||
|
teamsolid
Canada3668 Posts
On April 09 2012 02:19 branflakes14 wrote: But what incentive does Blizzard have to change anything when people are still buying their games en masse? Not giving them money is the ONLY way they'll improve. For one, e-mailing them directly in a reasoned manner? Politicians usually take action when (many) citizens sends a letter addressed directly to them. Or e-mailing E-Sports organizers, who could then tell Blizzard just how unacceptable it is to not have a save-game state feature. Not buying the game won't send the message that you aren't buying the game BECAUSE of the lack of save-game/LAN feature. There is no way Blizzard would ever know. Taking other actions may though. | ||
|
Chicane
United States7875 Posts
| ||
|
Th1rdEye
United States1074 Posts
| ||
|
archonOOid
1983 Posts
 | ||
|
Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo
Germany2959 Posts
On April 09 2012 02:28 Chicane wrote: Why not just have a rejoin like they have in Dota 2, LoL and HoN. HoN is a small relatively unknown company (at least before they made HoN) and they were able to implement it, so I imagine Blizzard could. Then when someone drops, they could just pause the game and wait for the other player to reconnect. You mean S2* Also, please, for the love of all programmers in the world, don't say stuff like: "Well completely different game A does it, so game B should do it too." None can say how much work it is for Blizzard to implement this, other than their engine, game and BNet programmers or guys like Dustin Browder who have to know pretty well how stuff works, the interface at least (not the complete implementation). I mean as far as SC2 goes, I myself would imagine this is certainly something doable and we will see it at least with the release of HotS. Still, one just cannot easily draw strings between 2 different games. | ||
|
bennedik
Germany127 Posts
On April 09 2012 02:13 visual77 wrote: I am a computer programmer, and have been doing it professionally since 2006. The replay files are stored as a sequence of commands, I believe. If this is not true, then disregard everything else I say. But, if it is a sequence of commands (player A clicked here, player B pressed 'a'), then restoring from a partial save is possible with how the save file is structured. You just fast-forward / rewind the save to the point you want, and then hit resume and essentially fork the game. This same method could be used to take an existing replay and fork the game, which could make for some interesting training sessions (if I would have noticed this drop faster, could I have won? let's go re-play the game right before then and you stop the drop and see what happens). As far as how difficult it would be to implement in game, I can't say. Being a computer programmer doesn't tell you how they wrote their code. They could have some stuff in there that makes this harder than it should be. That's not at all uncommon. All I can say with reasonable certainty is that if the save file is stored as a timestamped list of player commands, and the game engine recreates the game from that data, then the save file format already supports restoring from a partial save very easily. I agree with this 100%. In addition, if the game would not store the camera movement of the observers, or make those optional, in my opinion observers would no longer be able to slow down games if the observer lags. | ||
|
J.E.G.
United States389 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 09 2012 02:19 branflakes14 wrote: But what incentive does Blizzard have to change anything when people are still buying their games en masse? Not giving them money is the ONLY way they'll improve. Um...they already have our money. If you don't buy HotS I guess that could work, but most of the buyers only play the single player anyways. I think this route is much better. | ||
| ||
|
|
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Replay Cast
The PondCast
OSC
WardiTV European League
Replay Cast
Epic.LAN
CranKy Ducklings
Epic.LAN
CSO Contender
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
