|
Why is a "pitch fork" thread being made over something that is not confirmed and has its source based on a comment from a reddit post. Like the objective of this thread is for outrage?
Over something the poster is not even sure of himself at the time he posted?
I can't help but feel that's jumping the gun.
Edit: Ya this really reeks of creating an issue where there isn't one.
"PC Freeplay is an area of PAX where computers (provided by sponsors) are loaded with the latest PC games for the enjoyment of PAX attendees." http://wiki.paxcommunity.net/paxwiki/PC_Freeplay
God forbid Riot sponsors the freeplay PC area and doesn't want people playing their direct competitors game with THEIR money.
|
On September 01 2013 19:09 ACrow wrote:
Either way, we can be pretty sure that LoL/Riot is the reason that Dota isn't there, they are very agressive about other Mobas.
nah, Riot chose to exhibit at this convention, Valve just didn't.
|
United Kingdom50293 Posts
On September 01 2013 18:11 Inflicted_ wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 18:07 Birdie wrote:
Not that strange, wouldn't surprise me if Riot paid PAX to only allow LoL on the Freeplay PCs. Good promotion for them, as long as no one finds out and there's no negative backlash. Would Riot actually be able to bully out both Valve and Blizzard though...?
Tencent can. Easily.
|
but, but, good guy valve won't sellout to tencent rite?
|
Valve is fine without pushing Dota everywhere, it will be the #1 game on Steam for a long time with the momentum it has in gaining popularity this year.
|
I think it simply comes down to this, Riot as a company is willing to pay for exclusivity. Valve and Blizzard on the other hand don't care.
|
On September 01 2013 19:40 bokchoi wrote:
I think it simply comes down to this, Riot as a company is willing to pay for exclusivity. Valve and Blizzard on the other hand don't care.
Actually Riot is just a company full of douchebags like Pendragon, who cold-bloodedly backstab the community which helped them to rise and steals ideas (u may google for the reddit post, which proofs, that teemo was stolen by an idea published in the old playdota forum).
|
|
|
On September 01 2013 19:23 Kergy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 19:09 ACrow wrote:
Either way, we can be pretty sure that LoL/Riot is the reason that Dota isn't there, they are very agressive about other Mobas. nah, Riot chose to exhibit at this convention, Valve just didn't.
This isn't about exhibits, it's that the free pc area has just about every other Valve game installed except Dota 2 when they had it last year.
|
Its about time for blizz to get aggressive 
|
On September 01 2013 19:20 DonKey_ wrote:Why is a "pitch fork" thread being made over something that is not confirmed and has its source based on a comment from a reddit post. Like the objective of this thread is for outrage? Over something the poster is not even sure of himself at the time he posted? I can't help but feel that's jumping the gun. Edit: Ya this really reeks of creating an issue where there isn't one. "PC Freeplay is an area of PAX where computers ( provided by sponsors) are loaded with the latest PC games for the enjoyment of PAX attendees." http://wiki.paxcommunity.net/paxwiki/PC_FreeplayGod forbid Riot sponsors the freeplay PC area and doesn't want people playing their direct competitors game with THEIR money.
I'm not sure if it's the case at PAX Seattle but at PAX Aus i'm pretty sure the PC Area was provided by Intel.
Riot =/= Intel, in terms of sponsoring a PC area in my eyes.
|
United Kingdom50293 Posts
On September 01 2013 19:49 chriZqq wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 19:40 bokchoi wrote:
I think it simply comes down to this, Riot as a company is willing to pay for exclusivity. Valve and Blizzard on the other hand don't care. Actually Riot is just a company full of douchebags like Pendragon, who cold-bloodedly backstab the community which helped them to rise and steals ideas (u may google for the reddit post, which proofs, that teemo was stolen by an idea published in the old playdota forum).
Pendragon's a piece of shit, I think both league and dota communities agree on that.
|
On September 01 2013 20:05 ReignSupreme. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 19:20 DonKey_ wrote:Why is a "pitch fork" thread being made over something that is not confirmed and has its source based on a comment from a reddit post. Like the objective of this thread is for outrage? Over something the poster is not even sure of himself at the time he posted? I can't help but feel that's jumping the gun. Edit: Ya this really reeks of creating an issue where there isn't one. "PC Freeplay is an area of PAX where computers ( provided by sponsors) are loaded with the latest PC games for the enjoyment of PAX attendees." http://wiki.paxcommunity.net/paxwiki/PC_FreeplayGod forbid Riot sponsors the freeplay PC area and doesn't want people playing their direct competitors game with THEIR money. I'm not sure if it's the case at PAX Seattle but at PAX Aus i'm pretty sure the PC Area was provided by Intel. Riot =/= Intel, in terms of sponsoring a PC area in my eyes.
It isn't the case. http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/181590/pax-prime-2013-pc-tournament-schedule
Also the bandwidth excuse mentioned in the comment starts to sound less like BS.
+ Show Spoiler +"Another requirement that we started making a few PAX's ago, for the sake of bandwidth conservation, is that all Freeplay and Tournament games that are played, must have locally install-able servers or sponsored bandwidth. This did cut out a few titles (such as Battlefield 3) that simply didn't offer a local server option. Other companies have in the past opted to sponsor internet. That is why there are a few titles that are popular in the eSports arena that are not being played. It's not that we don't want them, just that we have to ensure that the network experience for both the Freeplayer's and the BYOC users meets expectations."
Seeing how Riot is actually likely to pay for the "sponsored bandwidth" and Valve isn't.
|
sorry being stupid but what fuck is PAX?
|
Probably because there's no point in having a non-local play game installed running from the same internet as the rest of the event, with people downloading and uploading meaning zero QoS, so they have a dedicated internet or something for the games themselves (hence the sponsor requirement for that).
Makes sense from a "we have internet and people using it will kill your online gaming experience" point of view.
Not sure that bandwidth is a legit concern, but it would be potentially unplayable if you are using the general internet for the event.
|
|
|
On September 01 2013 20:09 DonKey_ wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 20:05 ReignSupreme. wrote:On September 01 2013 19:20 DonKey_ wrote:Why is a "pitch fork" thread being made over something that is not confirmed and has its source based on a comment from a reddit post. Like the objective of this thread is for outrage? Over something the poster is not even sure of himself at the time he posted? I can't help but feel that's jumping the gun. Edit: Ya this really reeks of creating an issue where there isn't one. "PC Freeplay is an area of PAX where computers ( provided by sponsors) are loaded with the latest PC games for the enjoyment of PAX attendees." http://wiki.paxcommunity.net/paxwiki/PC_FreeplayGod forbid Riot sponsors the freeplay PC area and doesn't want people playing their direct competitors game with THEIR money. I'm not sure if it's the case at PAX Seattle but at PAX Aus i'm pretty sure the PC Area was provided by Intel. Riot =/= Intel, in terms of sponsoring a PC area in my eyes. It isn't the case. http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/181590/pax-prime-2013-pc-tournament-scheduleAlso the bandwidth excuse mentioned in the comment starts to sound less like BS. + Show Spoiler +"Another requirement that we started making a few PAX's ago, for the sake of bandwidth conservation, is that all Freeplay and Tournament games that are played, must have locally install-able servers or sponsored bandwidth. This did cut out a few titles (such as Battlefield 3) that simply didn't offer a local server option. Other companies have in the past opted to sponsor internet. That is why there are a few titles that are popular in the eSports arena that are not being played. It's not that we don't want them, just that we have to ensure that the network experience for both the Freeplayer's and the BYOC users meets expectations." Seeing how Riot is actually likely to pay for the "sponsored bandwidth" and Valve isn't.
I would really like to hear more from the people at PAX as to how the free PC area actually operates, are games like UT2K4 and Smite that are installed only playable on LAN?
|
On September 01 2013 19:51 jeppew wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 19:23 Kergy wrote:On September 01 2013 19:09 ACrow wrote:
Either way, we can be pretty sure that LoL/Riot is the reason that Dota isn't there, they are very agressive about other Mobas. nah, Riot chose to exhibit at this convention, Valve just didn't. This isn't about exhibits, it's that the free pc area has just about every other Valve game installed except Dota 2 when they had it last year. https://twitter.com/PurgeGamers/status/374041498112651264
uhmmm yeah, so Valve and those devs payed for certain games to be promoted but they didnt pay for Dota 2.
It's kinda weird but Valve doesn't seem too interested in promoting Dota in this kind of conventions, I was surprised that they didn't go to E3 or Gamescon... but maybe Riot bribed them too so I might as well quit #esports right now and lock myself in my basement with a tinfoil hat on and a shotgun by my side
|
On September 01 2013 20:33 jeppew wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 20:09 DonKey_ wrote:On September 01 2013 20:05 ReignSupreme. wrote:On September 01 2013 19:20 DonKey_ wrote:Why is a "pitch fork" thread being made over something that is not confirmed and has its source based on a comment from a reddit post. Like the objective of this thread is for outrage? Over something the poster is not even sure of himself at the time he posted? I can't help but feel that's jumping the gun. Edit: Ya this really reeks of creating an issue where there isn't one. "PC Freeplay is an area of PAX where computers ( provided by sponsors) are loaded with the latest PC games for the enjoyment of PAX attendees." http://wiki.paxcommunity.net/paxwiki/PC_FreeplayGod forbid Riot sponsors the freeplay PC area and doesn't want people playing their direct competitors game with THEIR money. I'm not sure if it's the case at PAX Seattle but at PAX Aus i'm pretty sure the PC Area was provided by Intel. Riot =/= Intel, in terms of sponsoring a PC area in my eyes. It isn't the case. http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/181590/pax-prime-2013-pc-tournament-scheduleAlso the bandwidth excuse mentioned in the comment starts to sound less like BS. + Show Spoiler +"Another requirement that we started making a few PAX's ago, for the sake of bandwidth conservation, is that all Freeplay and Tournament games that are played, must have locally install-able servers or sponsored bandwidth. This did cut out a few titles (such as Battlefield 3) that simply didn't offer a local server option. Other companies have in the past opted to sponsor internet. That is why there are a few titles that are popular in the eSports arena that are not being played. It's not that we don't want them, just that we have to ensure that the network experience for both the Freeplayer's and the BYOC users meets expectations." Seeing how Riot is actually likely to pay for the "sponsored bandwidth" and Valve isn't. I would really like to hear more from the people at PAX as to how the free PC area actually operates, are games like UT2K4 and Smite that are installed only playable on LAN?
UT2K4 is most definitely NOT limited to LAN.
|
Further info on situation.
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/181768/dota-2-ti3-look-who-s-comin-for-dinner/p38
"Got confirmation from an Enforcer, Dota 2 is not on the machines (and not allowed to be installed even if you login to your own Steam account) because Riot sponsored the area. In fact, Riot employees were walking around the area, and if you play LoL from a PAX computer you get double XP/IP.
So yeah, that's a thing. I am a bit frown town that PA/PAX saw this as okay. Doesn't this sort of go against the spirit of the entire convention? Or has it just reached a point where commercialization's unstoppable force has taken over? It's one thing to allow Riot to have a huge presence there, it's another to allow them to buy out the "free" play PC area and not allow a competitors game on the machines."
As expected Riot sponsored the freeplay area, and obviously didn't want people playing Dota2 there. Since people want to be angry in this thread feel free to direct your anger towards PA/PAX.
On September 01 2013 20:33 jeppew wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 20:09 DonKey_ wrote:On September 01 2013 20:05 ReignSupreme. wrote:On September 01 2013 19:20 DonKey_ wrote:Why is a "pitch fork" thread being made over something that is not confirmed and has its source based on a comment from a reddit post. Like the objective of this thread is for outrage? Over something the poster is not even sure of himself at the time he posted? I can't help but feel that's jumping the gun. Edit: Ya this really reeks of creating an issue where there isn't one. "PC Freeplay is an area of PAX where computers ( provided by sponsors) are loaded with the latest PC games for the enjoyment of PAX attendees." http://wiki.paxcommunity.net/paxwiki/PC_FreeplayGod forbid Riot sponsors the freeplay PC area and doesn't want people playing their direct competitors game with THEIR money. I'm not sure if it's the case at PAX Seattle but at PAX Aus i'm pretty sure the PC Area was provided by Intel. Riot =/= Intel, in terms of sponsoring a PC area in my eyes. It isn't the case. http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/181590/pax-prime-2013-pc-tournament-scheduleAlso the bandwidth excuse mentioned in the comment starts to sound less like BS. + Show Spoiler +"Another requirement that we started making a few PAX's ago, for the sake of bandwidth conservation, is that all Freeplay and Tournament games that are played, must have locally install-able servers or sponsored bandwidth. This did cut out a few titles (such as Battlefield 3) that simply didn't offer a local server option. Other companies have in the past opted to sponsor internet. That is why there are a few titles that are popular in the eSports arena that are not being played. It's not that we don't want them, just that we have to ensure that the network experience for both the Freeplayer's and the BYOC users meets expectations." Seeing how Riot is actually likely to pay for the "sponsored bandwidth" and Valve isn't. I would really like to hear more from the people at PAX as to how the free PC area actually operates, are games like UT2K4 and Smite that are installed only playable on LAN?
I'm assuming what it comes down to is that Riot doesn't want Dota2 specifically being played.(as it is their direct competitor) Seeing how they are the "sponsor"(whatever that entails) for the area, I'm assuming that the PAX staff is obligated to terms for the sponsorship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
