|
I have not been to PAx but a lot of people on the internet are saying that neither sc2 nor dota2 are allowed at PAX and the online online game allowed to be played is League of Legends
Here is a comment from someone on reddit who went to PAX:
I can confirm the very conspicuous lack of Dota 2 at PAX this year. I went both yesterday and today to the PC Freeplay area. On Friday, we were told "There is no Dota 2 because we can't install it". Their reason? "Not enough bandwidth". Note that they have other games such as TF2 installed no problem, and TF2 is a 12.5 GB game, more than twice the size of Dota 2. After giving us this excuse, they told us the same thing that Cyborgmatt had heard separately on his own, "You guys should play League instead, it's a great game."
And they sporadically announce over the intercom at the freeplay area that LoL is having a PAX-double XP event for everyone playing at PAX.
Today I went with Purge and again specifically asked PAX people if I could install Dota 2. The answer back, "League of Legends is the only game allowed to have online play here, all other games are only allowed to be on LAN." The attitude being polite, but very firm and very eager to end the conversation, as if they didn't want to talk about it any more.
sidenote: There is also no SC2 at all, when SC2 has been on PAX freeplay PCs for at least two years now.
to clarify: By "no Dota 2 at PAX" -- we're talking about the complete lack of Dota 2 at the PAX freeplay area, not necessarily the lack of a Dota 2 booth itself on the show floor (that would be up to Valve). But the PC freeplay area had Dota 2 last year, and this year it isn't even allowed to be installed.
link:
http://www.reddit.com/r/DotA2/comments/1lhzhw/lack_of_dota_2_at_pax_players_being_told_they/
In the link provided also purge gamers confirms that dota2 isn't at PAX.
Can anyone at pax confirm the lack of sc2?
Update 1
A user went to PAx and sc2 was being played
While I was at PAX Seattle on Friday, I noticed some people playing sc2. I didn't really pay much attention, but I can guarantee it was being played by several people. I thought there may have been a mini tournament or something as there was sc2 matches being shown on televisions above a couple players. Can't really say much for dota2 though. I was mainly interested in other things.
Update from a PAX person:
There's a lot of thought that goes into choosing of the tournaments each PAX. As mentioned, they are designed for fun, as we want to make the PC room a comfortable place for all players, and not intimidating when a crew of pro players wearing sponsored T's show up. Believe it or not, that can be intimidating. On the other hand, we know that the competitive spirit goes hand in hand with gaming, so there is a balance that we try to strike.
Having said that, there are other factors. For instance, which games are being loaded on to the machines, which exhibitors want to sponsor certain tournaments, and then the most important factor, what's the bandwidth usage like. Bandwidth is a tough problem to handle when you have 350+ Freeplay machines and 450+ BYOC machines all operating on the same internet pipe. We've been making huge improvements over the past couple of PAX's by implementing better Steam Proxies, rate limiting actual seats, and just being mindful what games are being played.
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.
We do have some eSport titles (like League of Legends) on the Freeplay machines that will be available to play, but no tournament. This is possibly because Riot may do something on their own. If you recall last years Riot Room, (which was freakin' awesome). I don't know if they are doing that again, but you never know. =)
I'm personally looking forward to the QWOP Tournament. I think lots of lawlz will be had! =)
source:http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/27572111/#Comment_27572111
Update 2
I just want to let people know that I've been to PAX on Friday and going again today (Sunday). The SC2 section is very small and isn't really a SC2 section. It's a Kingston Hyper X booth with just some small content from some players from EG and dignitas. Suppy, Incontrol, Demuslim and D.SeleCT
Update 3:robertkhoo the show director at PAX has an interesting conversation with somebody on reddit
]robertkhoo [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Hey, this is Robert Khoo from Penny Arcade - the show director to PAX. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. No amount of money is worth blocking games - besides the fact that it actually hurts the community, it would obviously hurt our relationship with one of our other partners, Valve. (and who doesn't want to have a good relationship with Valve - come on)
The only time we have EVER pulled a game was because of either technical issues (like bandwidth) or content reasons (in PAX Australia, funny enough, it was L4D2 because it's banned over there and we didn't know until the second day. oops.).
permalink
[–]ALL SKILLRayeth [score hidden] 7 minutes ago
Sooo you're saying the bandwidth needed for Dota 2 has magically increased since last year? Or it caused problems last year somehow? Yet all the other valve games work on the same system?
Because these sorts of things look EXACTLY like money-hatting regardless of what you say. Even if there is a good reason, you need to get out ahead of things like this or, well you can see the shitstorm that follows.
permalinkparent
[–]robertkhoo [score hidden] 39 seconds ago
I'll be honest with you, I don't know the exact reason why it was left off, but it certainly wasn't because anyone paid us too. We're actually looking into seeing if we can get them on the machines today since people have been notifying us of a local-server option for it. It really isn't that big of a deal, in truth.
http://www.reddit.com/r/DotA2/comments/1lhzhw/lack_of_dota_2_at_pax_players_being_told_they/cbzlevt
update 4
http://www.reddit.com/r/DotA2/comments/1lij8q/lack_of_dota_2_at_pax_pax_employee_pete_vapok/cbzlaeu
"I run the PC Room at PAX East, and I've run it at Prime before that a few times -- and I ran the PC Freeplay part of it before I took over the main room. Couple things -- Vapok is an Enforcer, not an employee. Secondly, Riot has literally no say on what we put on or keep off of the PC Freeplay machines with the sole exception of LoL -- we were going to pull it from our repertoire because of its bandwidth requirements until they stepped up to the plate to sponsor the bandwidth.
For the record, I'm also just an Enforcer."
|
"League of Legends helps SC2" - DJ Wheat
Jokes aside (or are they?) that's kinda strange if true.
|
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.
|
East Gorteau22261 Posts
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.
Yeah I wouldnt put that beyond Riot to be honest
|
On September 01 2013 18:05 BlackPanther wrote:
"League of Legends helps SC2" - DJ Wheat
Jokes aside (or are they?) that's kinda strange if true.
I honestly do not understand why valve and blizzard aren't responding to the aggressive business tactics done by riot.If I were Valve or Blizzard I would have had my own boycots against anything related to league of legends.Let this tournaments organizers lose all the sc2 and dota2 fans and remain only with league fans(and dota2 probably has more fans for online tournaments than league.And blizzard can boycot them with wow and diablo3 also.Valve could also impose the boycot with their other games such as halflife,cs,tf2).
|
Australia18228 Posts
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...?
|
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...?
if both those companies remain passive about it why not.I haven't seen any retaliation coming form wither valve or blizzard.
|
On September 01 2013 18:10 theking1 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 18:05 BlackPanther wrote:
"League of Legends helps SC2" - DJ Wheat
Jokes aside (or are they?) that's kinda strange if true. I honestly do not understand why valve and blizzard aren't responding to the aggressive business tactics done by riot.
Because Riot has the bigger/est game and on top of that is willing to pay extra money to make things like this happen.
Even if Blizzard and Valve were willing to match Riot's financial incentives for the organizers, they would still be forcing them to choose between a bigger game and a smaller game. Which is pointless if you're the side with the smaller game.
|
If Riot pays/sponsors for all the equipment, pcs, bandwidth, then they have the rights to not allow their direct competitor to promote their games on their equipment/pcs. PAX has the rights to refuse Riot's financial aids or ask Valve and Blizzard too.
I don't really see the problem here.
|
While I was at PAX Seattle on Friday, I noticed some people playing sc2. I didn't really pay much attention, but I can guarantee it was being played by several people. I thought there may have been a mini tournament or something as there was sc2 matches being shown on televisions above a couple players. Can't really say much for dota2 though. I was mainly interested in other things.
|
On September 01 2013 18:24 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 18:10 theking1 wrote:On September 01 2013 18:05 BlackPanther wrote:
"League of Legends helps SC2" - DJ Wheat
Jokes aside (or are they?) that's kinda strange if true. I honestly do not understand why valve and blizzard aren't responding to the aggressive business tactics done by riot. Because Riot has the bigger/est game and on top of that is willing to pay extra money to make things like this happen. Even if Blizzard and Valve were willing to match Riot's financial incentives for the organizers, they would still be forcing them to choose between a bigger game and a smaller game. Which is pointless if you're the side with the smaller game.
@magesoren
k man thanks for the info because if sc2 really is there this would be a misleading thread and i will delete it.but a lot of people are saying sc2 isn't there.I wonder what the truth is ?
|
On September 01 2013 18:09 Zealously 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. Yeah I wouldnt put that beyond Riot to be honest
Hasn't Riot done things like this historically? Things like asking teams not to pick up Dota 2 teams, and remain LoL only. It's no secret they don't like competition.
|
On September 01 2013 18:05 BlackPanther wrote:
"League of Legends helps SC2" - DJ Wheat
Jokes aside (or are they?) that's kinda strange if true.
Well, honestly. People keep saying that growth of other Esports are beneficial for everyone, and they couldn't be more wrong. Especially with how the games from LoL vs dota 2/sc2 growth in LoL is probably a negative thing for sc2. One could argue that it helps acceptance of video games as a sport, but honestly people would only see single games as such, if that ever happens.
Especially with RIOT always trying to have monopoly at event, it's quite disgusting. This is not the first time that you get the impression that they want to be alone at tournaments or other events, you see stories about it all the time. It was even confirmed by Dreamhack where RIOT didn't want them to have any dota 2 tournaments and they basicly replied with a "fuck you".
|
|
|
On September 01 2013 18:29 theking1 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 18:24 Talin wrote:On September 01 2013 18:10 theking1 wrote:On September 01 2013 18:05 BlackPanther wrote:
"League of Legends helps SC2" - DJ Wheat
Jokes aside (or are they?) that's kinda strange if true. I honestly do not understand why valve and blizzard aren't responding to the aggressive business tactics done by riot. Because Riot has the bigger/est game and on top of that is willing to pay extra money to make things like this happen. Even if Blizzard and Valve were willing to match Riot's financial incentives for the organizers, they would still be forcing them to choose between a bigger game and a smaller game. Which is pointless if you're the side with the smaller game. @magesoren k man thanks for the info because if sc2 really is there this would be a misleading thread and i will delete it.but a lot of people are saying sc2 isn't there.I wonder what the truth is ?
I would assume that there wasn't much people playing sc2. I only noticed just a few. I mean, there were an extremely huge variety of PC games being played, from FPS to RTS to etc. I did remembers seeing quite a lot of LoL games though.
|
Playing catch-up is a bad idea, Riot knows that and continues to stay a step ahead of the competition when it comes to marketing. Also, I'm certain that Riot isn't going to care a lot about people who're complaining about this, because chances are they have no interest in LoL in the first place.
|
On September 01 2013 18:32 LimitSEA wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 18:09 Zealously wrote: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. Yeah I wouldnt put that beyond Riot to be honest Hasn't Riot done things like this historically? Things like asking teams not to pick up Dota 2 teams, and remain LoL only. It's no secret they don't like competition.
Yeah, they did, but they denied though. Although I think it's a gray area really. At that time EG and col don't have a LoL team, and they wanted to pick up a team, but were told that they had to drop other moba teams. On the other hand, Dignitas had a LoL team at that time, and wanted to pick up a Dota2 team, so they contacted Riot and was told to do what they wanted, so Dignitas went and picked up Potm Bottom.
|
Can we close this thread already? It's already been disproven that SC2 was shut out of PAX and the rest of the theking1's statements are imploring Blizzard to retaliate for something that didn't happen.
|
On September 01 2013 18:52 coverpunch wrote:
Can we close this thread already? It's already been disproven that SC2 was shut out of PAX and the rest of the theking1's statements are imploring Blizzard to retaliate for something that didn't happen.
there are still people saying no sc2 at pax.I am surprised people who are at PAX aren't posting more to clear things up.It would be nice to know what is really going on.
|
Wasn't there even a division of EG for funsy games between pros and visitors being commentated by Incontrol? Pretty sure he tweeted about it or said it on ItG.
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.
|
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.
|
Ultimately if people want to be angry they should voice their displeasure to Penny Arcade. They organized the event and set this up.
|
Instead of using their money to block other games, they should probably improve theirs.
Shitty client/account security, no replays etc.
Oh well
|
On September 01 2013 20:09 DonKey_ wrote: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. "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.
People need to read this post and realize that it explains this situation.
Riot, having a presence at the actual show, most likely sponsored the bandwidth for their game to be on the freeplay machines.
|
There are some computers there that have dota 2, just not all of them.
|
On September 01 2013 20:52 ChaosShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 20:09 DonKey_ wrote: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. "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. People need to read this post and realize that it explains this situation. Riot, having a presence at the actual show, most likely sponsored the bandwidth for their game to be on the freeplay machines.
Which is a great thing for people that love the game, especially with the extra incentive of double xp/ip. Which is awesome for those leveling up accounts.
|
On September 01 2013 20:47 Chillax wrote:
Ultimately if people want to be angry they should voice their displeasure to Penny Arcade. They organized the event and set this up.
I agree I think this looks so much worse for the PAX organizers than Riot. Yeah, it's typical Riot but they are directly competing against Dota 2, I can understand that they want to promote their game. I think it definitely shows a lack of confidence in their own product to not even allow the choice of playing Dota 2, but it's PAX who gladly took money in order to institute this rule that Riot laid out.
If this was sponsored by Doritos and Dew and you couldn't eat anything else there'd be outrage over the commercialization of PAX and gaming events in general.
I don't even think it's a very good idea once the truth is out there, I think it looks good for Dota 2. When it gets reported, everyone will know what a threat the game is when the biggest game has to pay for it to not be present. How many people are at PAX compared to how many people who will hear the news of shit like this?
|
Korea (South)11232 Posts
This thread sounds like "one company cares about their game. The other doesnt. Lets hate on the one who does."
just blows my mind.
|
I get this weird feeling that DotA2 players have a strange persecution complex. The moment a news story could possibly break like this, reddit goes into a frenzy and a TL thread starts up with limited information.
Riot sponsor the PC Freeplay area, so want their game played and advertise for it? Golly gee. Shutting out their biggest rival is a little dickish, but understandable - and it's not like Valve are some kind of plucky underdog with no means to get word out about their product; you know, unrestricted access to the resources of the biggest PC gaming platform does come into play here.
There's nothing of value in this thread. Just a reddit crosspost and the attempt to get a kind of "Look at how evil Riot is" shout.
|
SC 2 is at pax, there have been a number of tweets from people attending a about playing it. There is a section of PC sponsored by Riot that do not have Dota installed, but it's not all the PCs.
I think we can stop pitchforking now.
|
On September 01 2013 21:05 Plansix wrote:
SC 2 is at pax, there have been a number of tweets from people attending a about playing it. There is a section of PC sponsored by Riot that do not have Dota installed, but it's not all the PCs.
I think we can stop pitchforking now.
And [/thread]
GG guys that's a wrap. Back to pitchforking Korea's stuff.
|
I dislike Riot so much I don't even want to post what I actually feel. It might be too much...
I wish people embraced competition more instead of copping out. I should join a political party and try convincing them to sponsor SC2 or Dota2 tournaments. NeSPA INC.
|
On September 01 2013 21:05 Plansix wrote:
SC 2 is at pax, there have been a number of tweets from people attending a about playing it. There is a section of PC sponsored by Riot that do not have Dota installed, but it's not all the PCs.
I think we can stop pitchforking now.
Just saw someone link this to twitter from the Penny Arcade forums (from someone who spoke to people at PAX) http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/27792059/#Comment_27792059Got 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.
|
On September 01 2013 21:09 Wintex wrote:
I dislike Riot so much I don't even want to post what I actually feel. It might be too much...
I wish people embraced competition more instead of copping out. I should join a political party and try convincing them to sponsor SC2 or Dota2 tournaments. NeSPA INC.
I bet they didn't even tell anyone and just delivered the PCs without Dota 2 on them. The Internet at convention centers normally sucks and it's not like they are going to install hundreds of copies of Dota 2. It would be like Riot to slide this under the radar and people only noticed once PAX started.
|
On September 01 2013 20:52 ChaosShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 20:09 DonKey_ wrote: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. "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. People need to read this post and realize that it explains this situation. Riot, having a presence at the actual show, most likely sponsored the bandwidth for their game to be on the freeplay machines.
The inner-quoted comment needs to be added to the OP by the OP or a mod. This was just premature pitchforking. Only games with LAN or sponsored bandwidth are allowed to be played multiplayer. At least according to the PAX people.
|
On September 01 2013 21:18 theking1 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 21:05 Plansix wrote:
SC 2 is at pax, there have been a number of tweets from people attending a about playing it. There is a section of PC sponsored by Riot that do not have Dota installed, but it's not all the PCs.
I think we can stop pitchforking now. Show nested quote +Just saw someone link this to twitter from the Penny Arcade forums (from someone who spoke to people at PAX) http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/27792059/#Comment_27792059Got 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.
An enforcer is not a supe reliable source(though he could be correct), either way it had no effect on SC 2 and the thread should be moved and title changed.
Edit: An the bandwidth thing makes way more sense. So no match making unless the company who owns the game pays for the bandwidth. Makes perfect sense. No pitchforking required.
|
Lets start a pitchfork thread about Valve not supporting e-sports and gaming because they have their own competition in isolation and don't sponsor other events, while Riot sponsor things at Pax and do stuff at Gamescom etc as well to make them better events.
|
On September 01 2013 20:59 Chexx wrote:
This thread sounds like "one company cares about their game. The other doesnt. Lets hate on the one who does."
just blows my mind.
That's a ridiculous notion.
One company allows external growth with their game, and doesn't throw money at events and teams.
|
On September 01 2013 21:27 ReignSupreme. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 20:59 Chexx wrote:
This thread sounds like "one company cares about their game. The other doesnt. Lets hate on the one who does."
just blows my mind. That's a ridiculous notion. One company allows external growth with their game, and doesn't throw money at events to make people like them.
One company doesn't bother showing up to an enormous gaming event.
The other pays for computers and internet there to foster growth and encourage more players.
Do you see how spin and bias works?
|
On September 01 2013 21:33 Kisra wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 21:27 ReignSupreme. wrote:On September 01 2013 20:59 Chexx wrote:
This thread sounds like "one company cares about their game. The other doesnt. Lets hate on the one who does."
just blows my mind. That's a ridiculous notion. One company allows external growth with their game, and doesn't throw money at events to make people like them. One company doesn't bother showing up to an enormous gaming event. The other pays for computers and internet there to foster growth and encourage more players. Do you see how spin and bias works?
One company invests in supporting teams and an ecosystem, including salaries, and promotes e-sports at a government level in their home country, enabling international competition to travel more easily to their home country.
One company holds a contest once a year and manages to get fans to pay for it outright by buying an in game item which almost certainly covers not only the prize pool costs, but also the costs to host the event.
This is fun, we should keep going.
|
On September 01 2013 21:38 Lonyo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 21:33 Kisra wrote:On September 01 2013 21:27 ReignSupreme. wrote:On September 01 2013 20:59 Chexx wrote:
This thread sounds like "one company cares about their game. The other doesnt. Lets hate on the one who does."
just blows my mind. That's a ridiculous notion. One company allows external growth with their game, and doesn't throw money at events to make people like them. One company doesn't bother showing up to an enormous gaming event. The other pays for computers and internet there to foster growth and encourage more players. Do you see how spin and bias works? One company invests in supporting teams and an ecosystem, including salaries, and promotes e-sports at a government level in their home country, enabling international competition to travel more easily to their home country. One company holds a contest once a year and manages to get fans to pay for it outright by buying an in game item which almost certainly covers not only the prize pool costs, but also the costs to host the event. This is fun, we should keep going.
One company does its best to put out an amazing product, raising the bar in esports, and challenging all its competitors to try and top their incredible investments into making their product successful.
The other company does its best to put out an amazing product, raising the bar in esports, and challenging all its competitors to try and top their incredible investments into making their product successful.
|
|
|
cannot understand people here. LoL is free, riot cares about its players, the game is always improving. Totally opposite of sc2. And you blame riot, wtf?!
|
On September 01 2013 21:56 saddaromma wrote:
cannot understand people here. LoL is free, riot cares about its players, the game is always improving. Totally opposite of sc2. And you blame riot, wtf?!
Er, what does any of that have to do with shady undercutting of competitors?
Riot's had a history of trying to fuck over the competition, this is just another notch in the belt.
|
Pretty sure the reddit OP (jesusfromnazareth) is also theking1, considering his last posts have been bashing MLG... lol
|
On September 01 2013 21:58 RockIronrod wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 21:56 saddaromma wrote:
cannot understand people here. LoL is free, riot cares about its players, the game is always improving. Totally opposite of sc2. And you blame riot, wtf?! Er, what does any of that have to do with shady undercutting of competitors? Riot's had a history of trying to fuck over the competition, this is just another notch in the belt.
How is this another notch in the belt? They did nothing wrong here, they didn't have an exclusive contract with PAX, Valve and Blizzard just didn't pay to have there games to be played there.
|
|
|
On September 01 2013 21:59 MasterOfPuppets wrote:Pretty sure the reddit OP (jesusfromnazareth) is also theking1, considering his last posts have been bashing MLG... lol
mlg is begining to piss off the dota 2 community by the way they organized fullsail and columbus . Did you see the fullsail teams?And they haven't even organized the first dota 2 tournament yet.With all the growth of scene talk adam was doing on reddit MLG will have to rely only on invited teams to get any viewers at columbus.Not to mention they have to dodge better known dota 2 tournaments and to provide a bigger prize pool than for sc2.200 bucks says that by next year the dota2 community will be asking for sundances head.
|
On September 01 2013 22:06 theking1 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 21:59 MasterOfPuppets wrote:Pretty sure the reddit OP (jesusfromnazareth) is also theking1, considering his last posts have been bashing MLG... lol mlg is begining to piss off the dota 2 community by the way they organized fullsail and columbus . Did you see the fullsail teams?And they haven't even organized the first dota 2 tournament yet.With all the growth of scene talk adam was doing on reddit MLG will have to rely only on invited teams to get any viewers at columbus.Not to mention they have to dodge better known dota 2 tournaments and to provide a bigger prize pool than for sc2.200 bucks says that by next year the dota2 community will be asking for sundances head.
oh yeah it's completely out of character for MLG to run invite-only events...................................
|
On September 01 2013 21:58 RockIronrod wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 21:56 saddaromma wrote:
cannot understand people here. LoL is free, riot cares about its players, the game is always improving. Totally opposite of sc2. And you blame riot, wtf?! Er, what does any of that have to do with shady undercutting of competitors? Riot's had a history of trying to fuck over the competition, this is just another notch in the belt.
i don't think anyone can legitimately say that riot is undercutting dota2. if valve isn't paying for the bandwidth for dota 2 then it's not riots fault. additionally it's completely logical that riot is spending so much more to compete with dota2 than valve. dota2 is probably a miniscule portion of valves profit while lol is obviously all of riot's. the lengths they will go to are going to be a lot more extreme compared to valve and blizz just because of their respective business models.
if, however it comes out that riot purposely paid to not have dota2 there and pax accepted these terms it probably gets a lot shadier.
|
No Dota 2... but at least there's Peggle Deluxe! +1 Valve
|
They have lots of time in advance to install the games on the machines. They do not have the bandwidth for 700+ people on computer playing multiplayer games plus the bandwidth to help run the entire convention. The only games that are allowed to be played online are the games where the companies paid for bandwidth or made custom servers, all the other games are played on lan or are single player. Read before you shit post
|
On September 01 2013 22:12 barnix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 21:58 RockIronrod wrote:On September 01 2013 21:56 saddaromma wrote:
cannot understand people here. LoL is free, riot cares about its players, the game is always improving. Totally opposite of sc2. And you blame riot, wtf?! Er, what does any of that have to do with shady undercutting of competitors? Riot's had a history of trying to fuck over the competition, this is just another notch in the belt. i don't think anyone can legitimately say that riot is undercutting dota2. if valve isn't paying for the bandwidth for dota 2 then it's not riots fault. additionally it's completely logical that riot is spending so much more to compete with dota2 than valve. dota2 is probably a miniscule portion of valves profit while lol is obviously all of riot's. the lengths they will go to are going to be a lot more extreme compared to valve and blizz just because of their respective business models. if, however it comes out that riot purposely paid to not have dota2 there and pax accepted these terms it probably gets a lot shadier.
from what I have seen during the international,the dota2 people can raise a lot of money really fast especially for the esport aspect of dota2.
|
Sounds like some Dota elitism here.
They have League instead of Dota, grab the pitchforks.
Seriously, who cares? Their excuse sounds very reasonable and league is by far the more popular game.
|
On September 01 2013 22:14 theking1 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 22:12 barnix wrote:On September 01 2013 21:58 RockIronrod wrote:On September 01 2013 21:56 saddaromma wrote:
cannot understand people here. LoL is free, riot cares about its players, the game is always improving. Totally opposite of sc2. And you blame riot, wtf?! Er, what does any of that have to do with shady undercutting of competitors? Riot's had a history of trying to fuck over the competition, this is just another notch in the belt. i don't think anyone can legitimately say that riot is undercutting dota2. if valve isn't paying for the bandwidth for dota 2 then it's not riots fault. additionally it's completely logical that riot is spending so much more to compete with dota2 than valve. dota2 is probably a miniscule portion of valves profit while lol is obviously all of riot's. the lengths they will go to are going to be a lot more extreme compared to valve and blizz just because of their respective business models. if, however it comes out that riot purposely paid to not have dota2 there and pax accepted these terms it probably gets a lot shadier. from what I have seen during the international,the dota2 people can raise a lot of money really fast especially for the esport aspect of dota2.
Yeah they raise a lot of money for esports through dota2 but all that money is considered miniscule compared to the rest of the money valve makes through steam and selling their own games
|
since only Dota2 Fans posting in this Thread here...why is it on sc2 forums. SC2 Players doesnt seem to care about this event. By the way i never heard of this event before...!?!
Edit: EG is on PAX
https://twitter.com/EvilGeniuses
I think they represent SC2 ;-)
|
This makes no difference imo.
People like me that play Dota and dislike Riot for throwing money at companies to avoid the possibility of people watching and playing Dota and finding it more interesting, will continue to play Dota and dislike Riot.
People that play LoL and feel that Riot are trying their best to support a thriving esports scene, and are merely sponsoring their game to be played at Pax, will continue to play LoL and like Riot.
People that don't like MOBA's and don't really care either way, will continue to not care either way.
|
On September 01 2013 22:19 cutler wrote:since only Dota2 Fans posting in this Thread here...why is it on sc2 forums. SC2 Players doesnt seem to care about this event. By the way i never heard of this event before...!?! Edit: EG is on PAX https://twitter.com/EvilGeniusesI think they represent SC2 ;-)
EG has a PAX exhibit, this thread 'was' referring to the PC area (where anyone can sit down and play games).
|
oh no, no dota2/sc2 at a pax, WOW MY LIFE IS RUINED.
people need better things to do with their time. what does this matter in the grand scheme of things?
|
On September 01 2013 22:38 zev318 wrote:
oh no, no dota2/sc2 at a pax, WOW MY LIFE IS RUINED.
people need better things to do with their time. what does this matter in the grand scheme of things?
Congrats, a post that lets you declare anything in the world to be irrelevant, all while arguing on the internet.
|
Riot gives PAX a bunch of money and gets to showcase their only game
Valve saves money and players can play all of their games except one
sounds like a win-win to me
|
Fuck Riot and fuck league of losers. Riot is terrible for esports, they should be shunned, ignored and black listed by everyone in the industry if they can.
They deserve nothing, LoL isn't even a real esport, its a casual game designed for casuals played for tens of thousands of dollars, what a joke.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
|
|
On September 01 2013 23:30 jaymik wrote:
^ thread is gold
It is living up to expectations.
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
What does sponsored Bandwith even mean?O.o
|
This really doesn't make sense. When i went to pax east earlier this year Dota 2 was installed @ PC Freeplay. There was also tons of machines with sc2 installed @ Mainhall...
|
On September 01 2013 23:37 Kipsate wrote:
What does sponsored Bandwith even mean?O.o
I assume it means that they are just giving them money to pay the bill.
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
So all games present need to have paid Pax in order to be played there?
|
On September 01 2013 23:46 Kipsate wrote:
So all games present need to have paid Pax in order to be played there?
It sounds like that is the case at least for the area where PAX visitors can play on the computers that were setup for public gaming (or have LAN capability so it doesnt eat into the bandwidth).
Other parts of the venue can do whatever they like it seems (booths, etc).
I would like to see if they are ok with LAN games like broodwar and maybe even some good old DotA1 being played in that area.
|
I hate the LoL vs Dota 2 debate. Can people just stop perpetuating the war.
|
does it really matter if dota 2 or sc2 or league are on the machines there? you're at PAX to check out the booths and get free swag and what not, not to sit there and play games you already own ;\
|
I just want to let people know that I've been to PAX on Friday and going again today (Sunday). The SC2 section is very small and isn't really a SC2 section. It's a Kingston Hyper X booth with just some small content from some players from EG and dignitas. Suppy, Incontrol, Demuslim and D.SeleCT
|
Given that non-LAN games played over the internet will be sensitive to packetloss and latency, and the fact that 99.9% of the attendees will have some form of internet using device on their person using any free internet available, it is reasonable for additional bandwidth/internet to be required for the actual gaming section with the free PCs. Otherwise they would just use the crap internet that everything else is using, and the games would be unplayable.
Or... you use games which support LAN play.
You don't need to pay PAX to have your game there, but you need to pay if you want it to be played over the internet, because as-is, the internet available wouldn't work for them if they are non-LAN.
That's how I understand it. Which seems reasonable and sensible. Who wants to play on a dodgy internet with 250ms ping and 50% packetloss? You need some sort of dedicated internet for the games if they are non-LAN, and that costs money.
|
On September 01 2013 23:53 Sprouter wrote:
does it really matter if dota 2 or sc2 or league are on the machines there? you're at PAX to check out the booths and get free swag and what not, not to sit there and play games you already own ;\
I beg to differ. It's pretty cool playing a game you own with a bunch of random people who have the same interest as you.
|
Guy claiming to be the show director from PAX commented here:
Hey, this is Robert Khoo from Penny Arcade - the show director to PAX. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. No amount of money is worth blocking games - besides the fact that it actually hurts the community, it would obviously hurt our relationship with one of our other partners, Valve. (and who doesn't want to have a good relationship with Valve - come on)
The only time we have EVER pulled a game was because of either technical issues (like bandwidth) or content reasons (in PAX Australia, funny enough, it was L4D2 because it's banned over there and we didn't know until the second day. oops.).
[edit]lol i dunno how to read
|
On September 02 2013 00:16 SpeaKEaSY wrote:Guy claiming to be the show director from PAX commented here: Show nested quote +Hey, this is Robert Khoo from Penny Arcade - the show director to PAX. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. No amount of money is worth blocking games - besides the fact that it actually hurts the community, it would obviously hurt our relationship with one of our other partners, Valve. (and who doesn't want to have a good relationship with Valve - come on)
The only time we have EVER pulled a game was because of either technical issues (like bandwidth) or content reasons (in PAX Australia, funny enough, it was L4D2 because it's banned over there and we didn't know until the second day. oops.).
The quote that someone pulled about blocking games due to bandwidth is taken from a forum post back in early August and doesn't seem relevant to this particular case
??? The way im reading it that is exactly what he is saying. He didnt deny that dota will not be played in the gaming area and he said that there are only two reasons why a game would not be played, content and technical issues, like bandwidth. And there is no content issue with dota soooo.....
|
from the dota2 reddit
"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."
So Riot paid for their bandwidth valve and blizzard didn't.
|
On September 02 2013 00:20 PassiveAce wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2013 00:16 SpeaKEaSY wrote:Guy claiming to be the show director from PAX commented here: Hey, this is Robert Khoo from Penny Arcade - the show director to PAX. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. No amount of money is worth blocking games - besides the fact that it actually hurts the community, it would obviously hurt our relationship with one of our other partners, Valve. (and who doesn't want to have a good relationship with Valve - come on)
The only time we have EVER pulled a game was because of either technical issues (like bandwidth) or content reasons (in PAX Australia, funny enough, it was L4D2 because it's banned over there and we didn't know until the second day. oops.).
The quote that someone pulled about blocking games due to bandwidth is taken from a forum post back in early August and doesn't seem relevant to this particular case ??? The way im reading it that is exactly what he is saying. He didnt deny that dota will not be played in the gaming area and he said that there are only two reasons why a game would not be played, content and technical issues, like bandwidth. And there is no content issue with dota soooo.....
lol wow i'm on 4 hours of sleep and reading comprehension is hard T_T
|
On September 01 2013 23:50 NeThZOR wrote:
I hate the LoL vs Dota 2 debate. Can people just stop perpetuating the war.
And maybe while they are at it, keep it out of the sc2 subforum ? Nah ,we are asking for too much, because esports!
|
United Kingdom50293 Posts
On September 02 2013 00:23 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2013 23:50 NeThZOR wrote:
I hate the LoL vs Dota 2 debate. Can people just stop perpetuating the war. And maybe while they are at it, keep it out of the sc2 subforum ? Nah ,we are asking for too much, because esports!
Saving esports, one angry forum post at a time!
|
It's their loss if they're not willing to make accommodations for SC2 and DotA 2. Would like an official announcement though >.>
|
Sad for me that they don't include sc2, but i am happy about them including League =D
|
On September 02 2013 00:16 SpeaKEaSY wrote:Guy claiming to be the show director from PAX commented here: Show nested quote +Hey, this is Robert Khoo from Penny Arcade - the show director to PAX. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. No amount of money is worth blocking games - besides the fact that it actually hurts the community, it would obviously hurt our relationship with one of our other partners, Valve. (and who doesn't want to have a good relationship with Valve - come on)
The only time we have EVER pulled a game was because of either technical issues (like bandwidth) or content reasons (in PAX Australia, funny enough, it was L4D2 because it's banned over there and we didn't know until the second day. oops.).
The quote that someone pulled about blocking games due to bandwidth is taken from a forum post back in early August and doesn't seem relevant to this particular case
the really question is how the second biggest game on the planet right now(dota2) just got left out accidentally and now that there ws a shitstorm on the forums the show manager tells us he had no idea how it happened and also the fact that he magicly found a magic local server to host dota2.This is weird as hell.There are only 2 options:the show manager is lying to save face or he is telling the truth which makes PAX look like one of the most unprofesional organizations on the Planet.
Also why steam did not have the option to install dota2 at PAX.Keep in mind the show managers comment came after after many dota2 personalitties who were there came with evidence that not only did dota2 was not present but they were not even allow to install it meaning the PAX people knew exactly what they were doing
|
On September 02 2013 00:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
It's their loss if they're not willing to make accommodations for SC2 and DotA 2. Would like an official announcement though >.>
Uhh...
On September 02 2013 00:21 Uracil wrote:from the dota2 reddit Show nested quote +"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." So Riot paid for their bandwidth valve and blizzard didn't.
No?
On September 02 2013 00:28 theking1 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2013 00:16 SpeaKEaSY wrote:Guy claiming to be the show director from PAX commented here: Hey, this is Robert Khoo from Penny Arcade - the show director to PAX. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. No amount of money is worth blocking games - besides the fact that it actually hurts the community, it would obviously hurt our relationship with one of our other partners, Valve. (and who doesn't want to have a good relationship with Valve - come on)
The only time we have EVER pulled a game was because of either technical issues (like bandwidth) or content reasons (in PAX Australia, funny enough, it was L4D2 because it's banned over there and we didn't know until the second day. oops.).
The quote that someone pulled about blocking games due to bandwidth is taken from a forum post back in early August and doesn't seem relevant to this particular case the really question is how the second biggest game on the planet right now(dota2) just got left out accidentally and now that there ws a shitstorm on the forums the show manager tells us he had no idea how it happened and also the fact that he magicly found a magic local server to host dota2.This is weird as hell.There are only 2 options:the show manager is lying to save face or he is telling the truth which makes PAX look like one of the most unprofesional organizations on the Planet. Also why steam did not have the option to install dota2 at PAX.Keep in mind the show managers comment came after after many dota2 personalitties who were there came with evidence that not only did dota2 was not present but they were not even allow to install it meaning the PAX people knew exactly what they were doing
Read the post Uracil quoted.
|
Valve just had TI3 man and this is technically the off-season for DotA teams to make changes. I wouldn't read anything into it not worth reading. You were already proven wrong about the SC2.
|
Drama, drama drama. It's not a huge deal at all. It's a bandwidth issue and not Riot stoping people from playing SC2.
|
On September 02 2013 00:43 Plansix wrote:
Drama, drama drama. It's not a huge deal at all. It's a bandwidth issue and not Riot stoping people from playing SC2.
There is no bandwidth issue with Dota, everyone understands the reason for sc, but dota cmon now.
|
On September 02 2013 00:46 xShadow53 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2013 00:43 Plansix wrote:
Drama, drama drama. It's not a huge deal at all. It's a bandwidth issue and not Riot stoping people from playing SC2. There is no bandwidth issue with Dota, everyone understands the reason for sc, but dota cmon now.
On September 02 2013 00:21 Uracil wrote:from the dota2 reddit Show nested quote +"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." So Riot paid for their bandwidth valve and blizzard didn't.
|
|
|
Really surprised this thread hasn't been closed yet.
|
On September 02 2013 00:31 MasterOfPuppets wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2013 00:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
It's their loss if they're not willing to make accommodations for SC2 and DotA 2. Would like an official announcement though >.> Uhh... Show nested quote +On September 02 2013 00:21 Uracil wrote:from the dota2 reddit "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." So Riot paid for their bandwidth valve and blizzard didn't. No? Show nested quote +On September 02 2013 00:28 theking1 wrote:On September 02 2013 00:16 SpeaKEaSY wrote:Guy claiming to be the show director from PAX commented here: Hey, this is Robert Khoo from Penny Arcade - the show director to PAX. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. No amount of money is worth blocking games - besides the fact that it actually hurts the community, it would obviously hurt our relationship with one of our other partners, Valve. (and who doesn't want to have a good relationship with Valve - come on)
The only time we have EVER pulled a game was because of either technical issues (like bandwidth) or content reasons (in PAX Australia, funny enough, it was L4D2 because it's banned over there and we didn't know until the second day. oops.).
The quote that someone pulled about blocking games due to bandwidth is taken from a forum post back in early August and doesn't seem relevant to this particular case the really question is how the second biggest game on the planet right now(dota2) just got left out accidentally and now that there ws a shitstorm on the forums the show manager tells us he had no idea how it happened and also the fact that he magicly found a magic local server to host dota2.This is weird as hell.There are only 2 options:the show manager is lying to save face or he is telling the truth which makes PAX look like one of the most unprofesional organizations on the Planet. Also why steam did not have the option to install dota2 at PAX.Keep in mind the show managers comment came after after many dota2 personalitties who were there came with evidence that not only did dota2 was not present but they were not even allow to install it meaning the PAX people knew exactly what they were doing Read the post Uracil quoted.
i red it.I also found it funny how after 1 day of forum shitsorms they miraculously found a local server for dota2 while in the previous days their employees were instructing poeple to play lol instead of dota2.What these reddit shitstorms do for you.Maybe if we write enough bad stuff about them they will miraculously find a sc2 server
|
More from that guy Robert Khoo
I'll be honest with you, I don't know the exact reason why it was left off, but it certainly wasn't because anyone paid us to. We're actually looking into seeing if we can get them on the machines today since people have been notifying us of a local-server option for it. It really isn't that big of a deal, in truth.
|
I guess thats what you get if 2 companies run the same free game, and the only thing matters is marketing and player/watcher-number
|
There's nothing wrong with paying to have your game in the spotlight of PAX. Say what you want, it's market capitalism. Competition is fierce, do what you need to and get out. It's all a business and your "entertainment" is only a portion of what the people at PAX, people at Riot, Valve, and Blizzard care about.
|
On September 02 2013 00:51 theking1 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2013 00:31 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On September 02 2013 00:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
It's their loss if they're not willing to make accommodations for SC2 and DotA 2. Would like an official announcement though >.> Uhh... On September 02 2013 00:21 Uracil wrote:from the dota2 reddit "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." So Riot paid for their bandwidth valve and blizzard didn't. No? On September 02 2013 00:28 theking1 wrote:On September 02 2013 00:16 SpeaKEaSY wrote:Guy claiming to be the show director from PAX commented here: Hey, this is Robert Khoo from Penny Arcade - the show director to PAX. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. No amount of money is worth blocking games - besides the fact that it actually hurts the community, it would obviously hurt our relationship with one of our other partners, Valve. (and who doesn't want to have a good relationship with Valve - come on)
The only time we have EVER pulled a game was because of either technical issues (like bandwidth) or content reasons (in PAX Australia, funny enough, it was L4D2 because it's banned over there and we didn't know until the second day. oops.).
The quote that someone pulled about blocking games due to bandwidth is taken from a forum post back in early August and doesn't seem relevant to this particular case the really question is how the second biggest game on the planet right now(dota2) just got left out accidentally and now that there ws a shitstorm on the forums the show manager tells us he had no idea how it happened and also the fact that he magicly found a magic local server to host dota2.This is weird as hell.There are only 2 options:the show manager is lying to save face or he is telling the truth which makes PAX look like one of the most unprofesional organizations on the Planet. Also why steam did not have the option to install dota2 at PAX.Keep in mind the show managers comment came after after many dota2 personalitties who were there came with evidence that not only did dota2 was not present but they were not even allow to install it meaning the PAX people knew exactly what they were doing Read the post Uracil quoted. i red it.I also found it funny how after 1 day of forum shitsorms they miraculously found a local server for dota2 while in the previous days their employees were instructing poeple to play lol instead of dota2.What these reddit shitstorms do for you.Maybe if we write enough bad stuff about them they will miraculously find a sc2 server
Maybe if we look for some drama long enough we will find it. The truth is out there.
Looks like they are working on it and dota just wasn't installed. Sounds like an enforcers might have "embellished" a bit.
|
On September 02 2013 00:58 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2013 00:51 theking1 wrote:On September 02 2013 00:31 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On September 02 2013 00:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
It's their loss if they're not willing to make accommodations for SC2 and DotA 2. Would like an official announcement though >.> Uhh... On September 02 2013 00:21 Uracil wrote:from the dota2 reddit "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." So Riot paid for their bandwidth valve and blizzard didn't. No? On September 02 2013 00:28 theking1 wrote:On September 02 2013 00:16 SpeaKEaSY wrote:Guy claiming to be the show director from PAX commented here: Hey, this is Robert Khoo from Penny Arcade - the show director to PAX. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. No amount of money is worth blocking games - besides the fact that it actually hurts the community, it would obviously hurt our relationship with one of our other partners, Valve. (and who doesn't want to have a good relationship with Valve - come on)
The only time we have EVER pulled a game was because of either technical issues (like bandwidth) or content reasons (in PAX Australia, funny enough, it was L4D2 because it's banned over there and we didn't know until the second day. oops.).
The quote that someone pulled about blocking games due to bandwidth is taken from a forum post back in early August and doesn't seem relevant to this particular case the really question is how the second biggest game on the planet right now(dota2) just got left out accidentally and now that there ws a shitstorm on the forums the show manager tells us he had no idea how it happened and also the fact that he magicly found a magic local server to host dota2.This is weird as hell.There are only 2 options:the show manager is lying to save face or he is telling the truth which makes PAX look like one of the most unprofesional organizations on the Planet. Also why steam did not have the option to install dota2 at PAX.Keep in mind the show managers comment came after after many dota2 personalitties who were there came with evidence that not only did dota2 was not present but they were not even allow to install it meaning the PAX people knew exactly what they were doing Read the post Uracil quoted. i red it.I also found it funny how after 1 day of forum shitsorms they miraculously found a local server for dota2 while in the previous days their employees were instructing poeple to play lol instead of dota2.What these reddit shitstorms do for you.Maybe if we write enough bad stuff about them they will miraculously find a sc2 server Maybe if we look for some drama long enough we will find it. The truth is out there. Looks like they are working on it and dota just wasn't installed. Sounds like an enforcers might have "embellished" a bit.
the drama you are talking about just gave thousands of dota2 fans the possibility to play their favourite game at PAX.The only thing we learn form this is that if we make enough drama and chaos people will listen.If you try to talk nicely to them they will not give a damn-just ask the dota 2 personalities who tried to have a polite conversation with the PAx people but were told to play lol and nobody wanted to discuss with them about dota2 not being there.
|
On September 02 2013 00:56 seoul_kiM wrote:
There's nothing wrong with paying to have your game in the spotlight of PAX. Say what you want, it's market capitalism. Competition is fierce, do what you need to and get out. It's all a business and your "entertainment" is only a portion of what the people at PAX, people at Riot, Valve, and Blizzard care about.
Except this wasn't the case. Riot wanted LoL to be on the computers so they gave money [and probably tech support and staff] to make sure LoL could be on those computers. If Valve and Blizzard wanted their big esports title to shine they could have done the same thing. Plus makes no sense for riot to care about sc2. Different genre of games and less market overlap.
|
On September 02 2013 01:05 theking1 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2013 00:58 Plansix wrote:On September 02 2013 00:51 theking1 wrote:On September 02 2013 00:31 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On September 02 2013 00:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
It's their loss if they're not willing to make accommodations for SC2 and DotA 2. Would like an official announcement though >.> Uhh... On September 02 2013 00:21 Uracil wrote:from the dota2 reddit "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." So Riot paid for their bandwidth valve and blizzard didn't. No? On September 02 2013 00:28 theking1 wrote:On September 02 2013 00:16 SpeaKEaSY wrote:Guy claiming to be the show director from PAX commented here: Hey, this is Robert Khoo from Penny Arcade - the show director to PAX. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. No amount of money is worth blocking games - besides the fact that it actually hurts the community, it would obviously hurt our relationship with one of our other partners, Valve. (and who doesn't want to have a good relationship with Valve - come on)
The only time we have EVER pulled a game was because of either technical issues (like bandwidth) or content reasons (in PAX Australia, funny enough, it was L4D2 because it's banned over there and we didn't know until the second day. oops.).
The quote that someone pulled about blocking games due to bandwidth is taken from a forum post back in early August and doesn't seem relevant to this particular case the really question is how the second biggest game on the planet right now(dota2) just got left out accidentally and now that there ws a shitstorm on the forums the show manager tells us he had no idea how it happened and also the fact that he magicly found a magic local server to host dota2.This is weird as hell.There are only 2 options:the show manager is lying to save face or he is telling the truth which makes PAX look like one of the most unprofesional organizations on the Planet. Also why steam did not have the option to install dota2 at PAX.Keep in mind the show managers comment came after after many dota2 personalitties who were there came with evidence that not only did dota2 was not present but they were not even allow to install it meaning the PAX people knew exactly what they were doing Read the post Uracil quoted. i red it.I also found it funny how after 1 day of forum shitsorms they miraculously found a local server for dota2 while in the previous days their employees were instructing poeple to play lol instead of dota2.What these reddit shitstorms do for you.Maybe if we write enough bad stuff about them they will miraculously find a sc2 server Maybe if we look for some drama long enough we will find it. The truth is out there. Looks like they are working on it and dota just wasn't installed. Sounds like an enforcers might have "embellished" a bit. the drama you are talking about just gave thousands of dota2 fans the possibility to play their favourite game at PAX.The only thing we learn form this is that if we make enough drama and chaos people will listen.If you try to talk nicely to them they will not give a damn-just ask the dota 2 personalities who tried to have a polite conversation with the PAx people but were told to play lol and nobody wanted to discuss with them about dota2 not being there.
Except that every thing you have theorized that been disproven and it looks like the game just wasn't installed. It's good to bring up the problem and get the game on the free to use PCs, it's not anything more than an oversight and an overly dramatic enforcer. Not massive plot to keep dota 2 out.
|
On September 02 2013 01:14 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2013 01:05 theking1 wrote:On September 02 2013 00:58 Plansix wrote:On September 02 2013 00:51 theking1 wrote:On September 02 2013 00:31 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On September 02 2013 00:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
It's their loss if they're not willing to make accommodations for SC2 and DotA 2. Would like an official announcement though >.> Uhh... On September 02 2013 00:21 Uracil wrote:from the dota2 reddit "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." So Riot paid for their bandwidth valve and blizzard didn't. No? On September 02 2013 00:28 theking1 wrote:On September 02 2013 00:16 SpeaKEaSY wrote:Guy claiming to be the show director from PAX commented here: Hey, this is Robert Khoo from Penny Arcade - the show director to PAX. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. No amount of money is worth blocking games - besides the fact that it actually hurts the community, it would obviously hurt our relationship with one of our other partners, Valve. (and who doesn't want to have a good relationship with Valve - come on)
The only time we have EVER pulled a game was because of either technical issues (like bandwidth) or content reasons (in PAX Australia, funny enough, it was L4D2 because it's banned over there and we didn't know until the second day. oops.).
The quote that someone pulled about blocking games due to bandwidth is taken from a forum post back in early August and doesn't seem relevant to this particular case the really question is how the second biggest game on the planet right now(dota2) just got left out accidentally and now that there ws a shitstorm on the forums the show manager tells us he had no idea how it happened and also the fact that he magicly found a magic local server to host dota2.This is weird as hell.There are only 2 options:the show manager is lying to save face or he is telling the truth which makes PAX look like one of the most unprofesional organizations on the Planet. Also why steam did not have the option to install dota2 at PAX.Keep in mind the show managers comment came after after many dota2 personalitties who were there came with evidence that not only did dota2 was not present but they were not even allow to install it meaning the PAX people knew exactly what they were doing Read the post Uracil quoted. i red it.I also found it funny how after 1 day of forum shitsorms they miraculously found a local server for dota2 while in the previous days their employees were instructing poeple to play lol instead of dota2.What these reddit shitstorms do for you.Maybe if we write enough bad stuff about them they will miraculously find a sc2 server Maybe if we look for some drama long enough we will find it. The truth is out there. Looks like they are working on it and dota just wasn't installed. Sounds like an enforcers might have "embellished" a bit. the drama you are talking about just gave thousands of dota2 fans the possibility to play their favourite game at PAX.The only thing we learn form this is that if we make enough drama and chaos people will listen.If you try to talk nicely to them they will not give a damn-just ask the dota 2 personalities who tried to have a polite conversation with the PAx people but were told to play lol and nobody wanted to discuss with them about dota2 not being there. Except that every thing you have theorized that been disproven and it looks like the game just wasn't installed. It's good to bring up the problem and get the game on the free to use PCs, it's not anything more than an oversight and an overly dramatic enforcer. Not massive plot to keep dota 2 out.
regarding riot banning dota2 form PAX yeah it was disproven.But the initail stuff was written this morning when no PAX reactions had taken place and when dota2 personalities were told to play lol and no on was allowed to play dota2.Regarding the drama part no.If nobody had started to make noise dota2 would not have been played right now.
|
then i guess this thread is over?
teh intarwebz saves the day once again?
|
|
|
Do not think the sc2 community will vent to much about this .Pax has never been a sc2 venue nor a sc2 reperesentative tournament like mlg,dremahack,gsl,osl etc.I personally only know about PAx since lol has a special event really PAX.Even the dota2 people are exagerrating a little bit since PAX does not have any large dota2 tradition.Yet it was from the very beginning a central riot/lol event
@PassiveAce
No.Now the question is:if valve valve and blizzard knew from the beginning about the requirements of PAX why did they not do anything about it?This can be the start of a beautiful witchhunt against valve and blizzard so everyone needs to keep their pitchforcs clean and sharp because you never know what will happen in the next couple of days.I persoanally might be writing this articles on reddit on my alt accounts so stay tuned and do not forget to upvote any pitchform articles you will find on reddit.
|
On September 02 2013 02:06 theking1 wrote:Do not think the sc2 community will vent to much about this .Pax has never been a sc2 venue nor a sc2 reperesentative tournament like mlg,dremahack,gsl,osl etc.I personally only know about PAx since lol has a special event really PAX.Even the dota2 people are exagerrating a little bit since PAX does not have any large dota2 tradition.Yet it was from the very beginning a central riot/lol event @PassiveAce No.Now the question is:if valve valve and blizzard knew from the beginning about the requirements of PAX why did they not do anything about it?This can be the start of a beautiful witchhunt against valve and blizzard so everyone needs to keep their pitchforcs clean and sharp because you never know what will happen in the next couple of days.I persoanally might be writing this articles on reddit on my alt accounts so stay tuned and do not forget to upvote any pitchform articles you will find on reddit.
We would expect no less from the boy who cried wolf.
|
On September 02 2013 02:13 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2013 02:06 theking1 wrote:Do not think the sc2 community will vent to much about this .Pax has never been a sc2 venue nor a sc2 reperesentative tournament like mlg,dremahack,gsl,osl etc.I personally only know about PAx since lol has a special event really PAX.Even the dota2 people are exagerrating a little bit since PAX does not have any large dota2 tradition.Yet it was from the very beginning a central riot/lol event @PassiveAce No.Now the question is:if valve valve and blizzard knew from the beginning about the requirements of PAX why did they not do anything about it?This can be the start of a beautiful witchhunt against valve and blizzard so everyone needs to keep their pitchforcs clean and sharp because you never know what will happen in the next couple of days.I persoanally might be writing this articles on reddit on my alt accounts so stay tuned and do not forget to upvote any pitchform articles you will find on reddit. We would expect no less from the boy who cried wolf.
it was a joke.your humor level=0
|
On September 02 2013 02:15 theking1 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2013 02:13 Plansix wrote:On September 02 2013 02:06 theking1 wrote:Do not think the sc2 community will vent to much about this .Pax has never been a sc2 venue nor a sc2 reperesentative tournament like mlg,dremahack,gsl,osl etc.I personally only know about PAx since lol has a special event really PAX.Even the dota2 people are exagerrating a little bit since PAX does not have any large dota2 tradition.Yet it was from the very beginning a central riot/lol event @PassiveAce No.Now the question is:if valve valve and blizzard knew from the beginning about the requirements of PAX why did they not do anything about it?This can be the start of a beautiful witchhunt against valve and blizzard so everyone needs to keep their pitchforcs clean and sharp because you never know what will happen in the next couple of days.I persoanally might be writing this articles on reddit on my alt accounts so stay tuned and do not forget to upvote any pitchform articles you will find on reddit. We would expect no less from the boy who cried wolf. it was a joke.your humor level=0
Or I just got the joke and ran with it.
|
On September 02 2013 02:18 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2013 02:15 theking1 wrote:On September 02 2013 02:13 Plansix wrote:On September 02 2013 02:06 theking1 wrote:Do not think the sc2 community will vent to much about this .Pax has never been a sc2 venue nor a sc2 reperesentative tournament like mlg,dremahack,gsl,osl etc.I personally only know about PAx since lol has a special event really PAX.Even the dota2 people are exagerrating a little bit since PAX does not have any large dota2 tradition.Yet it was from the very beginning a central riot/lol event @PassiveAce No.Now the question is:if valve valve and blizzard knew from the beginning about the requirements of PAX why did they not do anything about it?This can be the start of a beautiful witchhunt against valve and blizzard so everyone needs to keep their pitchforcs clean and sharp because you never know what will happen in the next couple of days.I persoanally might be writing this articles on reddit on my alt accounts so stay tuned and do not forget to upvote any pitchform articles you will find on reddit. We would expect no less from the boy who cried wolf. it was a joke.your humor level=0 Or I just got the joke and ran with it.
|
This is another example of sensationalism to the extreme in a rather unexciting scenario.
I'll concede that the statement "Riot paying PAX to block other games" does provide an explanation for why LoL is present and Dota2 / SC2 is not. However, just because it seems to fit doesn't immediately imply that it is true. It's an example of a frustrating trend particularly seen in gaming communities as of late. An explanation that "fits the situation" is immediately accepted as the correct explanation. Worse, people repeat it as gold truth!
The behavior gets out of hand when "discussion points" emerge from the (false) explanation, cementing a damaging viewpoint in others' minds. For example, "Should Riot be allowed to block other games?" "Is Riot abusing their power?" "Maybe this is the way of marketing in the future!" "Why did PAX accept that sort of money in this circumstance?" "Are they in financial trouble? Were they strongarmed?" etc etc. After a few hours, readers will begin internalizing the idea of "Riot paying off companies/organizations to feature them at the expense of others" or "PAX willing to do anything for money."
With heart-pounding readers seething at the dirty deal discussions, how weak does it sound for Robert Khoo to step in and say "Guys... that didn't happen" ? The average human mind wants an equally dramatic, weighty "truth" to replace the steeply controversial one. Remember all those internalized falsities? Here's where they pop up! "So, maybe Riot didn't pay you, but I understand that PAX is willing to do anything for more money!" "Well, what if Riot does start paying off PAX? I'm sure they've done it in other circumstances." "Psshh, do you really expect me to believe that? The evidence is pretty damning."
It's fucking maddening to read =[. Again, the "issue" presented in the OP is, in fact, a non-issue. But, some serious damage has already been done. Future PAX's now have to be hyper watchful of certain games not installing properly, or simply being overlooked (there's a ton of multiplayer games out there), lest they walk into another damaging, fabricated controversy >.<
|
Well said, Day[9].
Just another example of how a drama-hungry chunk of the community will jump on any and every opportunity to stir shit up and cause outrage.
Funny, it's the only thing the OP seems to be doing as of late in his posts... 
|
Vancouver14381 Posts
With that, I think this thread has run its course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
