|
A few things i noticed in the DOTA2 FAQ Q/A session recently
(full link - http://www.dota2.com/2010/11/dota-2-qa/)
Specifically
Q: Is there reconnect support for DotA 2? (by Vanes-UT)
A: This was actually one of the very first things we added early on, before the game was stable, in order to help with testing. You’ll also be able to have a friend of similar skill level substitute for you in case you have to leave. Players that want to improve their reputation in the game and community will also be able to help out by joining ongoing games that are missing players.
Q: Can I still play with my friends from America even though I am European? (by Adam Mosley)
A: Yes, a lot of people have friends in different regions and we want to allow them to easily interact. One of the things that makes DotA special is how big the community is, so we will do our best to make it easy to connect and communicate with one another.
Q: Will the replay system allow me to move freely backwards and forwards in time rather than having to watch a whole replay? (by Luciando)
A: You’ll be able to jump around to any point in the replay, add bookmarks for easy referencing, view detailed stats and graphs while the game is going, and watch through a specific player’s view (with regards to their camera movement). You’ll also be able to watch replays with friends if you want to review a game or learn from your mistakes. To aid videomakers, the replay system will have flexible camera angle and speed controls. There will also be a bunch of commentating and editing features you can add to your replays.
Q: Can you spectate an already ongoing DotA 2 game? (by Valo)
A: A lot of the game will be built around spectating and shoutcasting support. You will be able to join most ongoing games (unless the players marked it as private) and just watch them. You can join a game your friend is in, see what your favorite clan is doing, or simply pick a skill level and a hero you like and it will find you one to watch. We also have a system in place that automatically distributes the load to multiple servers so that the game itself won’t be affected by users joining to spectate. Our distribution network will allow us to support any number of users that want to watch, by dynamically assigning more servers to the task. There will also be special tags and search options to help you find live or old shoutcasted games. Shoutcasters will be able to operate as directors, so anyone watching will have his camera looking at the same things the shoutcaster is viewing. There is also an optional anti-cheat mechanism built in so that the game you are spectating can be time delayed by any amount of time to reduce potential abuse.
TL:DR
DOTA 2 can do reconnect support, cross server (EU to NA) play, better replay functionality (i.e. jumping) and you can join an ongoing game to spectate. Why can't SC2 support this when DOTA 2 can?
|
Holy.....shit. Blizzard -.-.
|
I really want that spectating option for starcraft 2
|
You can easily reconnect with Source engine...
SC2 on the other hand? Wasn't it built from the modified War3 engine? Or at least shares similar structures with it?
|
I wondered this when I switched over from HON
|
I looked at the title and assumed LAN, but no...
|
|
|
atleast the one thing you can be happy about,
sc2 replays are small, in the couple hundred kb`s
HoN (and i'm guessing the upcoming dota) replays will have been in the several mb`s lmao
|
United States47024 Posts
It's been discussed that in a game centered around 1v1, reconnect isn't practical. Spending a minute out of 45 minutes is a slight, but not terrible disadvantage in a MOBA. A minute disconnected in a 1v1 SC2 game is basically an unwinnable advantage, except in situations where the person remaining in game was already ridiculously behind..
|
On BlizzCon Blizzard announced better replay functions, like watching them together and stuff, can't remember all of it. They have announced that they are working on Cross Server support as well.
In terms of the reconnect Mechanic, if you disconnect in a 1on1 that match is lost, and the other player will most likely join his next match, so reconnecting won't make sense. It might be good in 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4 though.
The ingame Spectator Feature is something i personally do not like as much. I'd favor streams, just because it doesn't require you to have the game running and as a result of that you'd be able to watch games on more computers.
I think those Hotkey configs are great.
|
I think Blizzard should jsut implement a "play from XXX time" setting that can be integrated with save replay function.. If someone disconnects, simply save hte replay, load it up with that function, and continue playing.
|
I'm a little scared they didn't mention how they are going to handle legal action, if any, once they copyright Defense of the Ancients.
|
If you think about it, the reconnecting thing is kinda impossible if the opponent already technically "win" and then leave the game. So if you (the one who disconnect) reconnect, who will you play against really? No one is going to wait for you to reconnect! on the other hand, DOTA is a team game so ur team can def while u are being d/c so u can reconnect.
|
On November 02 2010 12:47 TheYango wrote:
It's been discussed that in a game centered around 1v1, reconnect isn't practical. Spending a minute out of 45 minutes is a slight, but not terrible disadvantage in a MOBA. A minute disconnected in a 1v1 SC2 game is basically an unwinnable advantage, except in situations where the person remaining in game was already ridiculously behind..
I think that SC2 should at least allow the possiblity, eg don't drop the opponent from the game unless the player still in agrees to it. That way in tournies if one player gets dc'd then they can rejoin the game without restarting.
Also same thing for casting/shoutcasting. Don't have to be in the game when it starts to join and spectate.
|
Starcraft 2 can probably do all this stuff. Whether Blizzard wants to or not is a different story.
|
oh wow.. lol.
well personally i think bnet 2.0 has the capacity to perform most of these functions. however, what people fail to realize is that blizzard released sc2 as an unfinished product. they did it as a favor really. they could have spent another year or so polishing up the game (with colored icons, etc) and bnet 2.0, but they decided to give us a fully playable version while adding in the features over time (watching replays with friends, chatrooms etc). i don't think its fair for us to fully judge sc2 until blizzard is done (with the final expansion). yeah that's gonna take a while, but that's how blizzard does things.
|
On November 02 2010 12:53 tok wrote:
I'm a little scared they didn't mention how they are going to handle legal action, if any, once they copyright Defense of the Ancients.
HoN, LoL, and Dota 2 don't seem to be facing any impending lawsuits anytime soon.
All they used to make DOTA was war3's game engine, the game as a whole was fairly new (and its smashing success was one of the reasons why Blizzard claims copyright over any new games modded from its game engines in SC2 now I believe?) and at the time there was no copyright over it.
I never did play DOTA or owned any steam games, I wonder if I should try it out 
|
On November 02 2010 13:00 da_head wrote:
oh wow.. lol.
well personally i think bnet 2.0 has the capacity to perform most of these functions. however, what people fail to realize is that blizzard released sc2 as an unfinished product. they did it as a favor really. they could have spent another year or so polishing up the game (with colored icons, etc) and bnet 2.0, but they decided to give us a fully playable version while adding in the features over time (watching replays with friends, chatrooms etc). i don't think its fair for us to fully judge sc2 until blizzard is done (with the final expansion). yeah that's gonna take a while, but that's how blizzard does things.
I don't think they've mentioned this at all.
Is this like a conspiracy and/or your hopes or did they say it anywhere? 
|
On November 02 2010 12:54 Lunares wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 12:47 TheYango wrote:
It's been discussed that in a game centered around 1v1, reconnect isn't practical. Spending a minute out of 45 minutes is a slight, but not terrible disadvantage in a MOBA. A minute disconnected in a 1v1 SC2 game is basically an unwinnable advantage, except in situations where the person remaining in game was already ridiculously behind.. I think that SC2 should at least allow the possiblity, eg don't drop the opponent from the game unless the player still in agrees to it. That way in tournies if one player gets dc'd then they can rejoin the game without restarting. Also same thing for casting/shoutcasting. Don't have to be in the game when it starts to join and spectate.
In a tournament setting a player should NEVER dc. I can count the number of dcs in bw proleague in the last 5 years with the fingers on my right hand. It's inexcusable how a match, potentially can determine the flow of thousands of dollars have a possibility of breaking.
|
On November 02 2010 12:40 nihoh wrote:
You can easily reconnect with Source engine...
SC2 on the other hand? Wasn't it built from the modified War3 engine? Or at least shares similar structures with it?
No Blizzard made Starcraft II's game engine from the ground up, just like they did for the original.
|
On November 02 2010 12:49 Bazinga wrote:
On BlizzCon Blizzard announced better replay functions, like watching them together and stuff, can't remember all of it. They have announced that they are working on Cross Server support as well.
In terms of the reconnect Mechanic, if you disconnect in a 1on1 that match is lost, and the other player will most likely join his next match, so reconnecting won't make sense. It might be good in 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4 though.
The ingame Spectator Feature is something i personally do not like as much. I'd favor streams, just because it doesn't require you to have the game running and as a result of that you'd be able to watch games on more computers.
I think those Hotkey configs are great.
they announced they were working on cross server way back in beta, and how we shouldnt buy several copies of the game because blizzard isnt greedy and wants to support their international community. However we are now a few months in release and not much has been made with this soon promise in regards to cross region play.
A reconnect option in a 1v1 works in a tournament environment or an environment where players know they will reconnect, Which is where this will see the most use, and also has the most importance.
the ingame spectator feature has its pros and cons.
1. you would be able to watch all high level games from your favorites. without having a caster or streamer get a hold of the replay.
|
On November 02 2010 13:02 Navi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 12:53 tok wrote:
I'm a little scared they didn't mention how they are going to handle legal action, if any, once they copyright Defense of the Ancients. HoN, LoL, and Dota 2 don't seem to be facing any impending lawsuits anytime soon. All they used to make DOTA was war3's game engine, the game as a whole was fairly new (and its smashing success was one of the reasons why Blizzard claims copyright over any new games modded from its game engines in SC2 now I believe?) and at the time there was no copyright over it. I never did play DOTA or owned any steam games, I wonder if I should try it out
You don't understand, the problem isn't Blizzard but that Valve intends to trademark the name "Dota" basically allowing them to sue others who use the same name.
On November 02 2010 13:07 KiF1rE wrote:
the ingame spectator feature has its pros and cons.
1. you would be able to watch all high level games from your favorites. without having a caster or streamer get a hold of the replay.
That would hurt progaming so much though, to the degree that all progamers would be forced to get hidden ID's or mark all of their games as private to make sure that people don't map out their strats. Also you would get no sponsor views from that.
|
On November 02 2010 13:04 Navi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 13:00 da_head wrote:
oh wow.. lol.
well personally i think bnet 2.0 has the capacity to perform most of these functions. however, what people fail to realize is that blizzard released sc2 as an unfinished product. they did it as a favor really. they could have spent another year or so polishing up the game (with colored icons, etc) and bnet 2.0, but they decided to give us a fully playable version while adding in the features over time (watching replays with friends, chatrooms etc). i don't think its fair for us to fully judge sc2 until blizzard is done (with the final expansion). yeah that's gonna take a while, but that's how blizzard does things. I don't think they've mentioned this at all. Is this like a conspiracy and/or your hopes or did they say it anywhere?
they've mentioned repeatedly that many of the features will be added after release since there wasn't time to do so before hand. also, given that they completely rehauled bnet (which is a massive undertaking), it will take years for them to fully optimize it. But once they do, it will serve as a platform for their new games years to come (diablo III, warcraft IV, their new mmo, etc)
|
HoN also has lan latency and can't be maphacked.
Blizzard doesn't want SC2 to be able to do this. Blizzard got superrich through WoW and is a huge name. No name companies with no experience and working on a loaned budget/investors can do all this crazy stuff Blizzard claims they can't or claims will take them months. Yes, Blizzard has never been the most tech savy game dev. But don't fall for all the Blizzcon smokescreens.
Also, Dota was never made by Blizzard but they will surely claim the IP rights just as they do with esports matches, which they also play no role in creating.
|
I like the idea of reconnecting... not for long disconnects, but brief ones. For example, when someone lags usually the "drop window" shows up, and a timer counts down from, say, 45 seconds. If I lose connection for like, half a second (which happens to me alot), I would rather that lag window pop up and then disappear, then disconnecting and losing the game outright.
Basically - give me 45 seconds of lag or disconnected time before the other player is given the option to boot me. (and pause the game for that time)
|
This is so stupid. Someone dropping for 2mins in a 5v5 Dota game isn't the same as someone dropping for 2mins in a 1v1. Pretty much a auto loss at that stage, anyone who isn't stupid will just roll the D/C'd player.
Adding this reconnect feature to SC2 would have been a waste of time and money.
|
Im thinking its going to be because you have to pay extra for it. You get what you pay for -.-"
|
From a technical standpoint, HoN and SC2 are very different.
While it's viable to have server side FoW in HoN, it isn't in SC2 due to the sheer number of objects [<75 vs 200+]. Also, the fact that creeps follow a set path, means that the server load is quite a bit lower [there are shortcuts you can take when an action is predictable and repeated]. So the only real FoW calculation for HoN is the 10 players, while in SC2 it's every object.
|
except SC2 got FACEBOOK FRIENDS :O! ....... woohoo?
yeah but i totally agree tho some of the stuff that SC2 lacks just doesn't seem to make sense
|
On November 02 2010 13:07 KiF1rE wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 12:49 Bazinga wrote:
On BlizzCon Blizzard announced better replay functions, like watching them together and stuff, can't remember all of it. They have announced that they are working on Cross Server support as well.
In terms of the reconnect Mechanic, if you disconnect in a 1on1 that match is lost, and the other player will most likely join his next match, so reconnecting won't make sense. It might be good in 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4 though.
The ingame Spectator Feature is something i personally do not like as much. I'd favor streams, just because it doesn't require you to have the game running and as a result of that you'd be able to watch games on more computers.
I think those Hotkey configs are great. the ingame spectator feature has its pros and cons. 1. you would be able to watch all high level games from your favorites. without having a caster or streamer get a hold of the replay. it mentions you can set it on private
|
On November 02 2010 13:12 Dommk wrote:
This is so stupid. Someone dropping for 2mins in a 5v5 Dota game isn't the same as someone dropping for 2mins in a 1v1. Pretty much a auto loss at that stage, anyone who isn't stupid will just roll the D/C'd player.
Adding this reconnect feature to SC2 would have been a waste of time and money.
If a player lags out they could at least give the other player an option to accept the forfeit or keep the game paused until the player rejoins. This way in tournaments a lagout in the middle of an epic game wouldn't force a rematch.
|
Valve =/= Activision-Blizzard
|
On November 02 2010 13:12 Dommk wrote:
This is so stupid. Someone dropping for 2mins in a 5v5 Dota game isn't the same as someone dropping for 2mins in a 1v1. Pretty much a auto loss at that stage, anyone who isn't stupid will just roll the D/C'd player.
Adding this reconnect feature to SC2 would have been a waste of time and money.
1v1 isn't the only way to play starcraft. I'd love it so much if my teammates (as well as my opponents) could reconnect in 3v3s. So many potentially great games ruined by a drop.
|
Can valve sue Blizzard for making Blizzard DOTA then? @@
|
On November 02 2010 12:47 TheYango wrote:
It's been discussed that in a game centered around 1v1, reconnect isn't practical. Spending a minute out of 45 minutes is a slight, but not terrible disadvantage in a MOBA. A minute disconnected in a 1v1 SC2 game is basically an unwinnable advantage, except in situations where the person remaining in game was already ridiculously behind..
Why not just pause the game until they get back as in every other e-sport where people get disconnected? There is nothing keeping Blizzard from just implementing a reconnect feature that gives the disconnected player a few minutes to reconnect, as it's currently implemented in HoN. Since it's 1v1, just set a limited pause timer, pausing the game, giving your opponent 3 minutes to reconnect, and after that it's up to the you to drop him or not, meaning you could wait longer if there are some serious problems during a tournament or such.
As for the spectating function, if you don't want people tuning in during your secret strategy scrims, just make the game private. In regards to Dota I don't see it as much of a problem as most scrims are either against other high level teams or in house games between several high level players. In either case, there are 10 people in every game, and you can't make the opposite team sign an NDA so there is a high chance of your strats getting out anyways. In the case if Dota and HoN I'd say that it's more part of the meta-game, as in knowing how to actually counter said strat since you can see it coming during the hero picking phase anyways.
|
Being able to spectate random games sounds like a nice benefit to me, seeing how I would love to watch random ladder matches but the main concern I could see if this was ever implemented is the lag. Everyone has seen the streamed games where the spectator brings lag in and causes disruptions to the game. An occurrence like this could be very frustrating if you are one of the players competing. When they implement the ability to watch replays with others I will be happy enough that watching ladder matches live would not be too big of a deal.
What would be cool is if you had the capability to download friends replay’s in Bnet by a button in their match history :/
|
Blizzard could easily implement something like a 45 to 90 second timer where the game stays frozen in the drop screen like it does already. The disconnected person then has a short window of opportunity to restart his computer/reconnect his internet.
If the timer expires, the person still connected to Bnet should have the option of either taking a victory after X amount of seconds passes or, if it's a tournament, be able to wait until his opponent has reconnected and resume playing.
The problem with Blizzard's current mechanic is that if your game client crashes or your internet connection completely goes out (I'm not talking about just a lagspike here), there is absolutely no way to reconnect, even if you can restart your client or reconnect within a very short time frame.
And for those that argue about the server load, do you have any idea how much server power Blizzard has at their disposal? World of Warcraft alone has, within a single geographical region, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of server controlled NPCs/Enemies all interacting with hundreds of thousands of player simultaneously, and you're telling me that freezing a game's status server-side for 45 seconds isn't doable? Surely there must be some old WoW servers lying around somewhere for Blizz to use.
|
Not a surprise. Valve is the smartest game studio on the planet.
|
On November 02 2010 13:26 Gamjadori wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 12:47 TheYango wrote:
It's been discussed that in a game centered around 1v1, reconnect isn't practical. Spending a minute out of 45 minutes is a slight, but not terrible disadvantage in a MOBA. A minute disconnected in a 1v1 SC2 game is basically an unwinnable advantage, except in situations where the person remaining in game was already ridiculously behind.. Why not just pause the game until they get back as in every other e-sport where people get disconnected? There is nothing keeping Blizzard from just implementing a reconnect feature that gives the disconnected player a few minutes to reconnect, as it's currently implemented in HoN. Since it's 1v1, just set a limited pause timer, pausing the game, giving your opponent 3 minutes to reconnect, and after that it's up to the you to drop him or not, meaning you could wait longer if there are some serious problems during a tournament or such.
Time and resources.
Netcode to do something like reconnection, especially on something like Battle.net would take quite sometime to do well, Blizzards development cycle must be pretty backed up considering that they didn't even have the time to get a custom hotkey GUI in for Battle.net on release.
|
On November 02 2010 13:31 0mar wrote:
Not a surprise. Valve is the smartest game studio on the planet.
and activision is the most incompetent
|
Valve knows where its at... Activision doesnt know what it is.
|
It's not a matter of why "CAN'T" Blizzard impement a feature.
It's a question of why they "WON'T" do it.
|
On November 02 2010 13:09 Xtar wrote:
Also, Dota was never made by Blizzard but they will surely claim the IP rights just as they do with esports matches, which they also play no role in creating.
DotA was made from the WC3 map editor, as they do with SC2, I'm pretty sure there's something about you forfeiting your rights to Blizzard on maps you release (Since you're using their work/efforts to make your map) DotA is essentially a Blizzard "product".
|
I blame the Xbox guy on how shit Battle.net 2.0 turned out.
Bnet is just so epic fail it's unbelievable. Props to Valve for delivering what people actually want.
|
Valve has shown, since they released Half-Life back in 1998, that they are leaps and bounds ahead of any other game studio on the planet.
|
hope people realise that DOTA =/= DotA before you think of the IP right etc.
on the other, i dont understand how anyone can praise or not think that Bnet2.0 is a inferior (read as: EPIC fail) system. i mean ,seriously, i find the 7yrs old(?) War3's bnet is more functional and user friendly. What??
|
On November 02 2010 13:23 nihoh wrote:
Can valve sue Blizzard for making Blizzard DOTA then? @@
Made an account just to address the suing comments in this thread. This is how I'd bet it's going down. Valve is going to hype the crap out of dota 2 and w3's dota version is going to be a really good way to tide over current fans or to bring old ones back into the fold, or god forbid get more people to try it out. However, once dota 2 launches I can expect Valve to huff and puff and about Blizzard removing dota from w3, after all they're competing with two other very similar games, why compete with yourself? Blizzard will of course say "No" because that's the only reason people still buy w3. It'll either go to court and Blizzard will win, or Valve will just say screw it and let the lack of support for the old version kill it off.
|
On November 02 2010 12:40 nihoh wrote:
You can easily reconnect with Source engine...
SC2 on the other hand? Wasn't it built from the modified War3 engine? Or at least shares similar structures with it?
Oh god, it is not a modified War3 engine. The architecture of the SC2 engine is far, far, far, far superior.
Things such as reconnecting have less to do with the engine and more to do with how they choose to implement their server system. Aka things are done client side in basically every Blizzard game; even a lot of stuff in WoW is done client side.
This is the opposite of a game like HoN which handles things server side, making it impossible to hack and possible for players to reconnect, because of a player DC's the game is still running.
That's the extent of my understanding; it's very possible that I'm wrong about the details.
|
On November 02 2010 13:42 RxN wrote:
Valve has shown, since they released Half-Life back in 1998, that they are leaps and bounds ahead of any other game studio on the planet.
I disagree. Up till recent years Valve handled their community and community feedback rather poorly. I can't remember a single instance in between 1998 and sometime in 2007 when Steam started getting good that Valve managed to produce a decent patch or feature for any of their games I played. I want to remember Blizzard being miles ahead of Valve at the start of this century in regards to community feedback, but recently it would seem the tables have turned.
|
Give it a time. I think there is huge team working on bnet now and I think we can only hope to see more features in future. As said in their interviews, they didn't wanted to delay sc2 because of bnet.
Don't fail me, Blizzard! :$
|
Starcraft2 can do anything, it's just fucking bnet2.0 where the epic fail lies.
|
do you really want chat channels?
|
On November 02 2010 13:59 andeh wrote:
do you really want chat channels?
We're getting all those things before next year. As long as they release chat hcannels, /f m, cross server play, multiplayer replay watching, i'll be happy with bnet 2.0
|
pretty sure b.net 2.0 capable of recon things, but it won't change a thing. Even if you can recon on 1v1, it will take some time and by the time you reconnected maybe your enemies have destroy your base. 5v5 sure missing 1 person in 1-2 minutes won't matters much, but on 1v1 RTS game it matters.
|
On November 02 2010 13:54 Gamjadori wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 13:42 RxN wrote:
Valve has shown, since they released Half-Life back in 1998, that they are leaps and bounds ahead of any other game studio on the planet. I disagree. Up till recent years Valve handled their community and community feedback rather poorly. I can't remember a single instance in between 1998 and sometime in 2007 when Steam started getting good that Valve managed to produce a decent patch or feature for any of their games I played. I want to remember Blizzard being miles ahead of Valve at the start of this century in regards to community feedback, but recently it would seem the tables have turned.
I would also like to add that valve has one of the worst costumer support teams of all the big game companies. They mess up a lot (cod mass ban anyone?) and you can never get an answer in case you get hacked. Blizzard has one of best even if you don't restrict it to the game industry.
|
Because they did all that just to post a big outdoor. `we are better than ya blizz `
competition is always nice hope we see resume play on hots or some random patch, it's so depressing when a game drops in a big tourney ...
|
On November 02 2010 13:54 Gamjadori wrote:
I disagree. Up till recent years Valve handled their community and community feedback rather poorly. I can't remember a single instance in between 1998 and sometime in 2007 when Steam started getting good that Valve managed to produce a decent patch or feature for any of their games I played. I want to remember Blizzard being miles ahead of Valve at the start of this century in regards to community feedback, but recently it would seem the tables have turned.
Valve has constently been ahead of other developers when they released models that moved with players talking way back on the goldsrc engine, the release of steam back in 2003 changed the gaming industry and how we get games, half-life 2 was a huge success in features, the source engine is one of the most flexible engines out there.
The dates youve specified are interesting because valve didnt really release a lot untill steam, but consider that they were making steam, so only smaller games such as opposing force/blue shift. Things like counter-strike although originall mods, have been taken in by valve and while some may argue that they have been made worse or not, Valve still has a large list of the most popular titles on the planet, from single player games to mutliplayer.
Another note is how many of valve's developers are from the valve community, former mod developers etc, from your statement it seems like youve only really been around valve games since 2005/6 most likely with the release of HL2 ep one
The interesting feature of course replays and how they will do them as of atm current demos, the source engines current replay system is about 10mb for an hour game but steam cloud only allows about 1mb storage per game.
As for DotA and lawsuits, valve already have DotA trademarked but so does a lil company called Dota allstars, so it will be interesting how that pans out, but valve did have it passed before dota-allstars LLC
TLDR; Valve good, blizzard naughty naughty boys
|
On November 02 2010 14:01 nihoh wrote:We're getting all those things before next year. As long as they release chat hcannels, /f m, cross server play, multiplayer replay watching, i'll be happy with bnet 2.0
So... basically you want bnet 1.0?
lol 
|
wow valve is like blowing sc2 out of the water in terms of game-side features...
|
On November 02 2010 12:41 shizi wrote:
I wondered this when I switched over from HON
same
On November 02 2010 13:39 Sinekyre14 wrote:
It's not a matter of why "CAN'T" Blizzard impement a feature.
It's a question of why they "WON'T" do it.
agreed
|
On November 02 2010 13:42 Highways wrote:
Bnet is just so epic fail it's unbelievable. Props to Valve for delivering what people actually want.
Can't disagree with the first sentence, but you do realize that Valve hasn't delivered anything yet, right? Game companies always promise the moon when they announce a game, and years later when the game is actually released, a lot of those features don't make it. I can absolutely guarantee you that DoTA2 will not have all these things as advertised. Also, it's ridiculous to compare a launched game to one that was just announced, and as others have said, many of those features don't even make sense for SC2.
As Gamjadori pointed out, Steam was a pile of shit for a few years after it was released too, and now it's great. That doesn't excuse Blizzard for releasing Bnet2 in its current shape, but people really need to keep it in mind when they're fawning over Valve and wondering why Blizzard can't be as good. Perhaps creating a social multigame platform for millions of people is a little harder than you think?
|
As long as blizzard can come through on the things they have promised and really change bnet 2.0 I will be happy. I am content with the current system but really could see it getting much better, and I would really love for blizzard to integrate some sort of actual esports ability into bnet2.0 itself. The GSL and MLG series are just so much fun to watch, craft cup and the like, I really do want it to succeed and it just seems like blizzard isn't devoting as much as they could to doing so.
Then again they are company and the company must make profits so that isn't too suprising.
|
On November 02 2010 14:35 ShadowDrgn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 13:42 Highways wrote:
Bnet is just so epic fail it's unbelievable. Props to Valve for delivering what people actually want. Can't disagree with the first sentence, but you do realize that Valve hasn't delivered anything yet, right? Game companies always promise the moon when they announce a game, and years later when the game is actually released, a lot of those features don't make it. I can absolutely guarantee you that DoTA2 will not have all these things as advertised. Also, it's ridiculous to compare a launched game to one that was just announced, and as others have said, many of those features don't even make sense for SC2. As Gamjadori pointed out, Steam was a pile of shit for a few years after it was released too, and now it's great. That doesn't excuse Blizzard for releasing Bnet2 in its current shape, but people really need to keep it in mind when they're fawning over Valve and wondering why Blizzard can't be as good. Perhaps creating a social multigame platform for millions of people is a little harder than you think?
We are talking about Valve, though. They are the direct Blizzard equivalent.
They have learned an awful lot during their TF2 experience. I have a sneaking suspicion that they may be able to deliver on some of their promises.
With all that said, I have some major reservations:
The one thing I would not like to see is a TF2 approach to DOTA. It should be ferocious and competitive, and every time you join a game it should be a serious investment. You should be playing THAT game to WIN that game. None of this "drop-in, drop-out" bull **** that actually made Call of Duty MW1 more fun to play on consoles than on PC.
When you join a TF2 game, you're messing around, firing rockets here, switching classes there, teams are getting autobalanced etc. It's great fun, absolutely, but aside from the really top end clan scrims, there's nothing competitive about it. I have no sense that the other team is desperately trying to win so much as both teams are just sort of chilling out and having fun like you might with three buddies when you play smash brothers.
That's great for TF2. But not for DOTA. I want to see a really serious ladder system, not the standard FPS model of having 12 vs. 12 and people just checking through their server browser to find a game they can hop into that valve seems to love on the basis that it "promotes community."
DOTA 2 should be all about eating carebears alive.
|
On November 02 2010 14:16 deek wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 13:54 Gamjadori wrote:
I disagree. Up till recent years Valve handled their community and community feedback rather poorly. I can't remember a single instance in between 1998 and sometime in 2007 when Steam started getting good that Valve managed to produce a decent patch or feature for any of their games I played. I want to remember Blizzard being miles ahead of Valve at the start of this century in regards to community feedback, but recently it would seem the tables have turned. Valve has constently been ahead of other developers when they released models that moved with players talking way back on the goldsrc engine, the release of steam back in 2003 changed the gaming industry and how we get games, half-life 2 was a huge success in features, the source engine is one of the most flexible engines out there. The dates youve specified are interesting because valve didnt really release a lot untill steam, but consider that they were making steam, so only smaller games such as opposing force/blue shift. Things like counter-strike although originall mods, have been taken in by valve and while some may argue that they have been made worse or not, Valve still has a large list of the most popular titles on the planet, from single player games to mutliplayer. Another note is how many of valve's developers are from the valve community, former mod developers etc, from your statement it seems like youve only really been around valve games since 2005/6 most likely with the release of HL2 ep one The interesting feature of course replays and how they will do them as of atm current demos, the source engines current replay system is about 10mb for an hour game but steam cloud only allows about 1mb storage per game. As for DotA and lawsuits, valve already have DotA trademarked but so does a lil company called Dota allstars, so it will be interesting how that pans out, but valve did have it passed before dota-allstars LLC TLDR; Valve good, blizzard naughty naughty boys
Actually contrary to your assumption I haven't really been around Valve since 2005, after the release of HL2. Once my HL2 mod project ended in early 2006 I've only come back to play the occasional HL2 episodes and Portal, which is why my opinion on Valve might be a little skewed towards how they used to operate in the older days.
As for Steam, sure it did (somewhat) change the way we distribute games today, but back in 2003 when it was released, it was a HUGE mess. Bugs everywhere, nothing worked like intended, and it ushered in the dreaded age where online connections are required to play even in a LAN environment (which was a hugh deal back then when most smaller LAN parties couldn't muster a decent Internet connection). While they eventually solved most problems, back then, most Valve games were pretty much unplayable for a few mouths due to Steam, and there were even people talking about setting up their own WON servers to bypass Steam.
As for Valves support for the modding community I agree that it's gotten pretty good, but at the release of HL2 it wasn't all that great. The actual modding tools where not released until way later than they initially promised, and modding HL2 upon release was not a pleasant experience, far from what Valve had promised.
As for modders being hired, back then I only remember a few of the original CS developers being brought on the team as Valve bought CS back in 2000. At that time it was pretty much the only multiplayer game they ran on their own, and in my opinion, since Valve acquired CS in 2000 they didn't release a single good patch in their 6 years of managing the game. The refused to fix the simplest of bugs yet continued to add "features" and changing gameplay that the community mass petitioned against.
Frankly, a lot of things with Valve back then were the same as things are with Blizzard right now. The whole "new system being shoved down our throats" despite being a downgrade is quite the same now with B.net 2.0 as it was with Steam back in the day. Perhaps Blizzard will, just like Valve, eventually sort things out. But lets not forget it's 2010 now, and not 2003 as with Steam. B.net 2.0 isn't some revolutionary experiment, it's the system that is running the games we love and play every day. As paying costumers we have the right to demand some functionality, especially when it's regarding simple problems that have either been solved by Blizzard themselves on previous occasions (such as chat channels and cross realm play) or by other companies (meaning it's proven doable). Most of what people are asking for is completely reasonable, and I see no reason why Blizzard can't solve these problems save greed or laziness.
|
On November 02 2010 12:47 TheYango wrote:
It's been discussed that in a game centered around 1v1, reconnect isn't practical. Spending a minute out of 45 minutes is a slight, but not terrible disadvantage in a MOBA. A minute disconnected in a 1v1 SC2 game is basically an unwinnable advantage, except in situations where the person remaining in game was already ridiculously behind..
But the game is already paused for that 45 seconds during a disconnect. I don't see why there can't be an option to rejoin if that timer is still counting down. I've lost team games due to my teammate's internet going out for a split second, and he's sitting there watching the timer countdown from across the room unable to do anything.
|
Australia7069 Posts
I hope that when this releases it'll force blizzard to implement the same features to match
|
Power to steam and Dota2. Good competition makes the other racers push even harder to produce great games.
|
On November 02 2010 14:04 Shana wrote:
pretty sure b.net 2.0 capable of recon things, but it won't change a thing. Even if you can recon on 1v1, it will take some time and by the time you reconnected maybe your enemies have destroy your base. 5v5 sure missing 1 person in 1-2 minutes won't matters much, but on 1v1 RTS game it matters.
The game is paused, no?
|
On November 02 2010 15:00 Meta wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 12:47 TheYango wrote:
It's been discussed that in a game centered around 1v1, reconnect isn't practical. Spending a minute out of 45 minutes is a slight, but not terrible disadvantage in a MOBA. A minute disconnected in a 1v1 SC2 game is basically an unwinnable advantage, except in situations where the person remaining in game was already ridiculously behind.. But the game is already paused for that 45 seconds during a disconnect.
That is a lag timer, not a disconnect timer.
If you your net D/C's you get dropped straight away in SC2.
|
On November 02 2010 13:59 andeh wrote:
do you really want chat channels?
Ironically, DOTA 2 won't have traditional chat channels either (apart from steam group chats) from what i know up until now.
soooooo ...
|
On November 02 2010 12:38 Lunares wrote:
Why can't SC2 support this when DOTA 2 can?
Because DOTA2 was in development much longer than sc2... no wait, that's not right.
|
Valve has HLTV, best spectator program ever! Nothing beat being able to watch a CS match from whatever POV I wanted to watch. HLTV was very spoiling for all CS players when it comes to watching other live games because nothing can compare to the functionality and awsomeness of controlly what you see while listening to a cast to keep track of what you might be missing. Seriously, Blizzard needs to pick that up from them. I tried making a couple posts during beta on their suggestion forums but no one seemed to care 
However, I'm assuming in DotA-2 the game would continue after someone disconnects thereby making the person that dropped behind in game. You really can't support that in Starcraft, I mean seriously, how would the logic behind that work? In a 1v1 your opponent drops you just rush their base and kill them before they reconnect. And to Hell if I'm waiting for them to "maybe" be able to reconnect.
A reconnect feature does not belong in SC2 ladder games, an argument can be made, however, for custom games and would make sense for Blizzard to possibly add, assuming you can actually use the vote kick on the chat box to get rid of players if you don't want to wait.
|
On November 02 2010 13:08 da_head wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 13:04 Navi wrote:On November 02 2010 13:00 da_head wrote:
oh wow.. lol.
well personally i think bnet 2.0 has the capacity to perform most of these functions. however, what people fail to realize is that blizzard released sc2 as an unfinished product. they did it as a favor really. they could have spent another year or so polishing up the game (with colored icons, etc) and bnet 2.0, but they decided to give us a fully playable version while adding in the features over time (watching replays with friends, chatrooms etc). i don't think its fair for us to fully judge sc2 until blizzard is done (with the final expansion). yeah that's gonna take a while, but that's how blizzard does things. I don't think they've mentioned this at all. Is this like a conspiracy and/or your hopes or did they say it anywhere? they've mentioned repeatedly that many of the features will be added after release since there wasn't time to do so before hand. also, given that they completely rehauled bnet (which is a massive undertaking), it will take years for them to fully optimize it. But once they do, it will serve as a platform for their new games years to come (diablo III, warcraft IV, their new mmo, etc)
The question still remains: why the hell weren't those things planned from the beginning? Apart from being a really good game, these features (ability to play with people all over the world, chat channels, shared replays, clans) made Starcraft the game that it is today.
|
Valve is inherently superior to blizzard in the sense that they have a very powerful infrastructure in the server/connection/logistics side of things..
|
if Blizzard adds LAN, i would call it a tie easily. Man, hope they release a gameplay trailer soon....
|
Just wait Starcraft 2 is very young and Blizzard is still very actively patching it. Starcraft 2 will get better overtime. Valve has been constantly working on updating Steam and their Source engine for 6 years. Just give Blizzard some time, they are the best developer in the world, and Blizzard DOTA will be a vastly better game than DOTA 2.
|
On November 02 2010 13:12 Dommk wrote:
This is so stupid. Someone dropping for 2mins in a 5v5 Dota game isn't the same as someone dropping for 2mins in a 1v1. Pretty much a auto loss at that stage, anyone who isn't stupid will just roll the D/C'd player.
Adding this reconnect feature to SC2 would have been a waste of time and money.
Facebook integration is a waste of time and money, sort of.
But a reconnect feature... don't think only about yourself laddering. Think about those tournaments ruined because 1 player was dropped. With a reconnect feature they would be able to pause the game until the player is back in the game.
|
Well sc2 definatly got the short stick on this one...
|
Well dota 2 is just a editor game in sc2 So the least they can do is add the replay and all the other stuff.
I think it sucks that ice frog doesnt use the sc2 editor :/ He should have rather made a deal with blizz than valve. I dont think dota 2 will ever come close to dota's fame..
|
On November 02 2010 13:23 nihoh wrote:
Can valve sue Blizzard for making Blizzard DOTA then? @@
And why would you think that?
Because Icefrog is working for them?
First of you don't own the maps or content created in the editor, and even if you would , it wouldn't make any diference.
Icefrog only took Dota over from version 5.96b.
Previosly the developer was Guinsoo and the original creator was Eul.
Eul make Dota, Guinsoo made Dota: Allstars and Icefrog continued Dota: Allstars from version 5.96b. Also dota was actualy designed after an old sc1 custom map AoS.
So Icefrog is the least deserving person of all dota creators. People give him way to much credit.
|
On November 02 2010 12:53 tok wrote:
I'm a little scared they didn't mention how they are going to handle legal action, if any, once they copyright Defense of the Ancients.
Icefrog (DOTA's creator) is working for Valve on Dota 2. There are no copyright issues.
|
On November 02 2010 18:16 daheadhunter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 12:53 tok wrote:
I'm a little scared they didn't mention how they are going to handle legal action, if any, once they copyright Defense of the Ancients. Icefrog (DOTA's creator) is working for Valve on Dota 2. There are no copyright issues.
Wrong. There are already problems because blizzard is making a minigame called dota 2 as well.
Also as someone mentioned ice frog isnt the original creator of dota. And i doubt that he has the rights of the dota name. I mean i doubt anyone has
|
On November 02 2010 18:16 daheadhunter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 12:53 tok wrote:
I'm a little scared they didn't mention how they are going to handle legal action, if any, once they copyright Defense of the Ancients. Icefrog (DOTA's creator) is working for Valve on Dota 2. There are no copyright issues.
People need to stop saying Icefrog is the creator of DotA ..
OT:
Reconnection in 1v1 is dumb. simple as that
cross-server was promised so idk ..
still cant believe B.net 2.0 doesnt have lan latency. i might be wrong though .. never felt lag playing HoN, but im hella lag with SC2 .. wtf
|
I find it amusing that SC2, being the flagship for E-Sports, does not have these spectating options.
|
Except for spectating options I find this list pretty poor. SCII simply doesn't need a reconnection tool, and don't act like it is a new invention because it is already been used in LoL. So I think Blizzard knew about the reconnection but didn't feel it was necessary. Upon which I agree.
Dota 2 is also scheduled for +1 year. Which means, we will have Diablo 3. Which means, who cares >? In all seriousness, I love(d) DotA and I will buy DotA 2 only to support Icefrog. But Blizzard will not be sitting on their hands during the development of DotA 2. So please, remake this thread when 1 year passed and we are enjoying a balanced SCII, the ubergame Diablo III and DotA 2. It will be on epic scale level, but I would be supriced if DotA 2 will be the best created game.
|
Isn't letting random people join any game not marked as private to watch a horrible idea?
Free maphack.
I assume this has already been mentioned, though not on the 3 pages I loosely checked over.
I mean clearly Blizzard's Bnet sucks, but I am really wary about the way Valve is talking about DOTA2. Do they really "get" it?
|
On November 02 2010 19:04 Turbovolver wrote:
Isn't letting random people join any game not marked as private to watch a horrible idea?
Free maphack.
I assume this has already been mentioned, though not on the 3 pages I loosely checked over.
I mean clearly Blizzard's Bnet sucks, but I am really wary about the way Valve is talking about DOTA2. Do they really "get" it?
"There is also an optional anti-cheat mechanism built in so that the game you are spectating can be time delayed by any amount of time to reduce potential abuse."
|
It´s a different game.
I believe there to be reason for Blizzard actions, other than being huge dicks like most people see them?
|
Imagine b-net 2.0 in one year when dota 2 comes out. I bet we have all those features +clan support and whatnot. Also chat, diablo 3 etc pp, so while i will prolly end up buying dota 2 i dont think the system will be better or even remotely close to b-net 2.0 in a year :D
|
We are comparing the abilities of an engine released in 2010, and a highly modified version of an engine released in 1996.
2010 being StarCraft 2 Engine.
1996 being the Quake Engine.
On an interesting note, David Kirsch is working on Dota 2, he was also a programmer for the quakeworld client and designed 3wave CTF.
|
I'm sure SC2 CAN support these things.
It's just that manpower is devoted elsewhere, and they just haven't decided to support these things. Yet, anyway. Who knows what the expansions hold.
|
all those features would be absolutely awesome in sc2!
|
I'm almost certain that SC2 is capable of loading saved games in a lobby, and then having players fill in the empty player spots. In order to add reconnect, all that needs to be done is pause the game, save it, send it to the joining player, let him load it and the continue the game. You can skip the pause part entirely by simply saving the game, send it to the player and then send the "replay data" for the last few seconds to the joining player.
That said, there is no need for this feature since SC2 is not a team game like FPS shooters (and DOTA) is. Rejoining a game just a minute later will probably mean you have already lost.
|
On November 02 2010 18:16 daheadhunter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 12:53 tok wrote:
I'm a little scared they didn't mention how they are going to handle legal action, if any, once they copyright Defense of the Ancients. Icefrog (DOTA's creator) is working for Valve on Dota 2. There are no copyright issues.
afaik he's the guy who is working on dota atm, but not the creator, there were many before him
i think some of the items and heros are named after them
|
I'll be honest, reconnect is not really practical for 1v1 games. Even for 1 min our of the game you are pretty much toast.
|
are you guys really this dense
BNET 2.0 = Anti piracy measure
It had nothing to do with features, just a way to secure their online platform so people couldn't pirate and play online. Thats why there is no lan, shitty features etc. It was 100% about securing the online from pirates. Thats why all the features where missing.
|
I really want to buy this game once it comes out.
|
On November 02 2010 19:44 Sanguinarius wrote:
I'll be honest, reconnect is not really practical for 1v1 games. Even for 1 min our of the game you are pretty much toast.
It wouldnt be, except when you put a forced pause on it! Which would be required for any RTS game.
|
On November 02 2010 19:46 dacthehork wrote:
are you guys really this dense
BNET 2.0 = Anti piracy measure
It had nothing to do with features, just a way to secure their online platform so people couldn't pirate and play online. Thats why there is no lan, shitty features etc. It was 100% about securing the online from pirates. Thats why all the features where missing.
Yes, but it's the fact that it has been glorified by word of mouth that makes people think it should be this great and amazing thing.
They really didn't get rid of much from b.net to b.net2
Chats
/f m
Watch replays with friends
Play on other servers
While those are nice, there is no guarantee we will never see them again...
|
On November 02 2010 20:16 Tethyrian wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 19:46 dacthehork wrote:
are you guys really this dense
BNET 2.0 = Anti piracy measure
It had nothing to do with features, just a way to secure their online platform so people couldn't pirate and play online. Thats why there is no lan, shitty features etc. It was 100% about securing the online from pirates. Thats why all the features where missing. Yes, but it's the fact that it has been glorified by word of mouth that makes people think it should be this great and amazing thing. They really didn't get rid of much from b.net to b.net2 Chats /f m Watch replays with friends Play on other servers While those are nice, there is no guarantee we will never see them again...
+Clan chat.
And the list is quite big really, esp cross server play.
|
I think the OP forgot another important question:
Q: What hotkey setup will exist in DotA 2? (by Stany Kaff)
A: We have a few default templates that cover the most popular configurations, but you’ll also be able to fully customize them to your liking. You can customize it on a global level or on a per hero basis if you choose. The hotkey configuration will include everything, not just heroes and items, but also how you navigate in the game, control the camera, autocast, set control groups, etc. Your settings are saved to your identity online, so if you go to a LAN center you will not have to reconfigure your keys.
|
Does anyone know if Clan support will be added for Starcraft 2?
I havn't heard anything about it.
|
On November 02 2010 20:34 Highways wrote:
Does anyone know if Clan support will be added for Starcraft 2?
I havn't heard anything about it.
i think they said they are going to add it at some point in the future
|
Lol, such a funny situation :/
|
This Q&A is all talk. I'm not saying it's not gonna happen, but right now the only point of this is getting the hype up for DOTA2. So wait & see.
|
The only thing DOTA2 has a leg up over Battle.net is the joining while a game is in progress and rejoin after DC. All the other features have been confirmed by Blizzard to be "in the works" or "coming soon"
People are getting awfully critical of Blizzard not having features that a game that has not been released yet. There's a good chance that half the stuff will be in battle.net by the time DOTA2 is released.
|
On November 02 2010 20:47 Bob Loblaw wrote:
This Q&A is all talk. I'm not saying it's not gonna happen, but right now the only point of this is getting the hype up for DOTA2. So wait & see.
no it's not
this stuff is all found in HoN so they have to include it in Dota 2 to compete
Also it's not hard to implement all of these things (relatively). Blizzard focused entirely on anti piracy with bnet 2.0, everything else was an afterthought. I don't understand how anyone could think bnet 2.0 is a good platform except for the bottom lines. Its entirely 50 steps backwards in every respect but anti-piracy.
ANYONE who thinks otherwise is wrong. Bnet 2.0 was entirely created to be an anti piracy measure.
For the people who are stupidly wrong above, check out, http://www.heroesofnewerth.com/ And read all the features listed.
-Anti Maphack using client/server netcode (it's impossible to maphack)
-Reconnecting
-Replays database with fastforward/rewind and jump to time
-Extensive stat tracking
etc. It's 10x better than bnet 2.0 feature wise, and Valve with even more resources will be even better
Bnet 2.0 from a client standpoint is terrible, it's only redeeming factor is that it causes SC2 online to not be piratable (so far).
|
I'd like the ability to make a game with a title on it. That way when I'm pubbing custom games, I don't have to sift through 3,000 silver level kids.
|
On November 02 2010 21:03 broke wrote:
I'd like the ability to make a game with a title on it. That way when I'm pubbing custom games, I don't have to sift through 3,000 silver level kids.
Then they cant promote marketplace maps by making them featured on a controlled list
|
Battle net was built on top of their WoW framework, hence the region stuff. Everything else is because this is Valve not Blizz, these guys know how to their jobs (just take their friggin time !)
But maybe I'm just a Valve fanboi (same if Westwood was still independent/existed), they've earnet their trust not just with Half Life but with steam and their treatment of third party's, their good honest people*.
(*being friggin rich can help on that front mind, hell tf2 hats earnt a fortune)
|
On November 02 2010 13:05 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:
No Blizzard made Starcraft II's game engine from the ground up, just like they did for the original.
Kinda missed the part that said "RAD game tools" on the load screen of SC1 heh ?
On November 02 2010 13:07 KiF1rE wrote:
they announced they were working on cross server way back in beta, and how we shouldnt buy several copies of the game because blizzard isnt greedy and wants to support their international community.
LMFAO
|
On November 02 2010 13:08 Klockan3 wrote:
You don't understand, the problem isn't Blizzard but that Valve intends to trademark the name "Dota" basically allowing them to sue others who use the same name.
- Valve hired Icefrog & co.
- Blizzvision had ~10 years to do it and cash in on a huge success.
- They didn't.
- Icefrog = Valve = DOTA = To hell with Blizzvision, and happily at that.
Blizz has no copyright over jack shit that's done on their platform, even a trainee lawyer could debunk that bullshit corporate sleazebag claim in 30 seconds.
|
The first two are things they took from HoN
|
On November 02 2010 12:47 TheYango wrote:
It's been discussed that in a game centered around 1v1, reconnect isn't practical. Spending a minute out of 45 minutes is a slight, but not terrible disadvantage in a MOBA. A minute disconnected in a 1v1 SC2 game is basically an unwinnable advantage, except in situations where the person remaining in game was already ridiculously behind..
This only really matters in ladder games.
In a practice game your enemy (practice partner) can pause and wait for you.
In a tournament match, an admin can pause and wait for you.
In a any sort of multiplayer vs AI or various custom maps the ability to reconnect would be great.
|
Valve <3
Seems they will finally have a new game published which will be popular in the e-sport scene.
|
On November 02 2010 18:03 PerfectTear wrote:
Eul make Dota, Guinsoo made Dota: Allstars and Icefrog continued Dota: Allstars from version 5.96b. Also dota was actualy designed after an old sc1 custom map AoS.
So Icefrog is the least deserving person of all dota creators. People give him way to much credit.
Guinsoo made Dota go completely apeshit. Basically turned it into a grander footy frenzy with his unkillable heroes and hidden runes lol.
|
Russian Federation4405 Posts
I think DOTA 2 looks pretty good. Valve doesn't make brooms. :D
I probably even will (OMG OMG) play it (while dota being a swear word in russian Starcraft community :D )
|
On November 02 2010 12:40 nihoh wrote:
You can easily reconnect with Source engine...
SC2 on the other hand? Wasn't it built from the modified War3 engine? Or at least shares similar structures with it? SC2 shares the same network architecture, not the actual net-code.
|
|
|
Most of this stuff comes for nearly free in a server-client game which DOTA2 seems to be. If you can write the code for a server that smoothly transmits the positions and velocities for >1000 units to 8 players in a 4v4 game, I'm sure Blizzard will be happy to hire you. They don't get an excuse for lack of cross-realm and multiplayer savegames in case someone disconnects from a custom game though.
|
Q: Is there reconnect support for SC2 2?
A: Soon. Maybe. We're looking into it. E-Sport! Yeah!
Q: Can I still play with my friends from America even though I am European?
A: NEW ICONS FOR DIAMOND LEAGUES FELLAZ! E-SPORTZ BABY!
Q: Will the replay system allow me to move freely backwards and forwards in time rather than having to watch a whole replay?
A: How can you watch something that hasn't even happend yet?
Q: Can you spectate an already ongoing SC 2 game?
A: It's called GSL. Lolololol HI FAIV BITCHES M I RITE?
Q: What custom hotkey setup will exist in SC 2?
A: None.
|
Valve FTW! Am stoked about DOTA2. Hope they give Obsidian her riteful due.
IceFrog is really THE MAN.
|
I think they would just lose time giving us a reconnecting feature, why they just dont give us the LAN support we want? its not that hard, in major tournaments (LAN tournaments) it will most likely solve all latency/drops problems. It also would make me happier to be able to make LANs with my friends and enjoy sc2, than be able to reconnect
P.S: both things would be ideal :D
|
From the sounds of it DOTA2 will be hosted server-side where SC2 is a p2p setup
Many of the things they describe there are simply impossible utilizing a peer-peer networking setup
|
I love how casually they announces these features for a fucking sideproject when we have been screaming about them for the REAL sc2 that we payed 60+ dollars for since beta.
|
Battle.net 2.0 is never going to allow for a legal method of offline play. And that's still the primary concern. "This is a really good gaming service" will have a damn hard time changing that.
|
It's not that Blizzard can't, it's that they don't care. The only reason they're adding chat channels is because people whined enough. And adding chat channels won't cause them to gain/lose much money.
|
Ummm... Is it just me or does it sounds like having games be that easy to spectate is just asking for mass cheating??
How many morons are gonna have a friend watching the game? I guess you can just mark every game as private.
|
Considering that most of the times I have disconnected in a ladder game that it just kicked me back to the sc2 menu screen. I should be allowed to rejoin before the disc window was even done counting down for the opponent.
|
On November 02 2010 13:05 AssuredVacancy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 12:54 Lunares wrote:On November 02 2010 12:47 TheYango wrote:
It's been discussed that in a game centered around 1v1, reconnect isn't practical. Spending a minute out of 45 minutes is a slight, but not terrible disadvantage in a MOBA. A minute disconnected in a 1v1 SC2 game is basically an unwinnable advantage, except in situations where the person remaining in game was already ridiculously behind.. I think that SC2 should at least allow the possiblity, eg don't drop the opponent from the game unless the player still in agrees to it. That way in tournies if one player gets dc'd then they can rejoin the game without restarting. Also same thing for casting/shoutcasting. Don't have to be in the game when it starts to join and spectate. In a tournament setting a player should NEVER dc. I can count the number of dcs in bw proleague in the last 5 years with the fingers on my right hand. It's inexcusable how a match, potentially can determine the flow of thousands of dollars have a possibility of breaking.
It's not any more inexcusable than computers crashing or the power going out. Not having LAN sucks, but it's not some unfathomable travesty. The GSL is perfectly entertaining and competitive, and just because MLG had issues with the net connection at the Gaylord Hotel doesn't mean Bnet isn't doing an adequate job.
|
On November 02 2010 13:34 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 13:31 0mar wrote:
Not a surprise. Valve is the smartest game studio on the planet. and activision is the most incompetent
Activision is a publisher.
And I don't understand why people are such Valve fanboys, they're the developer that made HL2 episodic and then released episodes every 3 years.
|
On November 02 2010 23:22 kojinshugi wrote:
It's not any more inexcusable than computers crashing or the power going out. Not having LAN sucks, but it's not some unfathomable travesty. The GSL is perfectly entertaining and competitive, and just because MLG had issues with the net connection at the Gaylord Hotel doesn't mean Bnet isn't doing an adequate job.
big difference between a dedicated studio hosting SC2 tournaments and a random touring location with no control over the internet access quality at that location. Which the following is how all "Foreign" events work. there is no dedicated place... meaning bnet isnt doing an adequate job in addressing the issues of esports in countries without dedicated tournament locations basically.
|
On November 02 2010 22:16 Jayson X wrote:Show nested quote +Q: Is there reconnect support for SC2 2?
A: Soon. Maybe. We're looking into it. E-Sport! Yeah!
Q: Can I still play with my friends from America even though I am European?
A: NEW ICONS FOR DIAMOND LEAGUES FELLAZ! E-SPORTZ BABY!
Q: Will the replay system allow me to move freely backwards and forwards in time rather than having to watch a whole replay?
A: How can you watch something that hasn't even happend yet?
Q: Can you spectate an already ongoing SC 2 game?
A: It's called GSL. Lolololol HI FAIV BITCHES M I RITE?
Q: What custom hotkey setup will exist in SC 2?
A: None.
The art department doesn't handle network code, but I'm hoping you're just being facetious.
The replay system doesn't allow you to move forwards in time because a replay is a recording of issued commands, not the exact game state of every frame. The engine has to "play out" what happened because many game state changes are dynamic results of those recorded commands (e.g. you issue a command to kill destructible rocks, and skipping that command means the rocks magically re-appear).
Reconnecting is also impossible exactly because of this. Communicating the full game state is a terrible idea in an online game, and the matches aren't "instanced" on a central server that would record the state for you. Bnet just relays commands between clients.
How do you synchronize clients after a disconnect? Your client doesn't know at which exact moment the connection was dropped, so you might move some units while the other player's client is not receiving that information. When they reconnect, should those actions be rolled back and re-performed by the computer?
Spectating ongoing games might be possible by "streaming" the replay data to different clients that aren't actually in the game, because them getting out of sync isn't an issue.
|
On November 02 2010 20:51 dacthehork wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 20:47 Bob Loblaw wrote:
This Q&A is all talk. I'm not saying it's not gonna happen, but right now the only point of this is getting the hype up for DOTA2. So wait & see. no it's not this stuff is all found in HoN so they have to include it in Dota 2 to compete
Well, not at all. I play HoN so yeah i can tell.
There's a reconnect system, but no joining random games to fill in stuff, if you wanna play EU vs US (or US vs SEA, etc), there is gonna be a ping problem, and we see that happening all the time in competitive games, that's why they often switch servers during BO3s. No replay watching with friends either, when you want to do that you just basically load up a replay each on your own and try to sync up via skype. You can't join ongoing games to spectate. There is no AI in HoN. And the replay search system is ridiculously bad.
So yeah, when i say this is all talk, it is. Maybe they will manage to feature all this good stuff, but for now all we've seen are 4 artworks, not even a single screenshot of the actual game, so excuse me when i say i'll believe it when i see it.
|
On November 02 2010 23:24 kojinshugi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 13:34 travis wrote:On November 02 2010 13:31 0mar wrote:
Not a surprise. Valve is the smartest game studio on the planet. and activision is the most incompetent Activision is a publisher. And I don't understand why people are such Valve fanboys, they're the developer that made HL2 episodic and then released episodes every 3 years.
then who made bnet 2.0?
here, let me answer for you:
activision.
wikipedia:
Activision is an American video game developer and publisher,
|
Simple, as far as customer satisfaction goes (among other things): Valve > Blizzard.
|
I don't know why people keep saying Activision controls Blizzard.
As far as I know, the merger clarified that Blizzard would remain autonomous and maintain its own corporate leadership.
And Vivendi is still the overall owner of the whole thing.
|
On November 02 2010 23:40 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 23:24 kojinshugi wrote:On November 02 2010 13:34 travis wrote:On November 02 2010 13:31 0mar wrote:
Not a surprise. Valve is the smartest game studio on the planet. and activision is the most incompetent Activision is a publisher. And I don't understand why people are such Valve fanboys, they're the developer that made HL2 episodic and then released episodes every 3 years. then who made bnet 2.0? here, let me answer for you: activision. wikipedia:
Blizzard made Battlenet and Starcraft 2.
|
On November 02 2010 23:40 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 23:24 kojinshugi wrote:On November 02 2010 13:34 travis wrote:On November 02 2010 13:31 0mar wrote:
Not a surprise. Valve is the smartest game studio on the planet. and activision is the most incompetent Activision is a publisher. And I don't understand why people are such Valve fanboys, they're the developer that made HL2 episodic and then released episodes every 3 years. then who made bnet 2.0? here, let me answer for you: activision.
No they didn't. Blizzard did.
Incontrovertible proof!
Activision hasn't been a developer in ages.
|
On November 02 2010 23:43 kmkg wrote:
Simple, as far as customer satisfaction goes (among other things): Valve > Blizzard.
I'm not satisfied as a Valve customer. Steam is a DRM-ridden pile of crap that controls your game installs. It's just a somewhat convenient way to buy games.
And as far as their games go, HL2 was so badly overhyped it's not even funny. It was a workable shooter but nothing revolutionary. They're the same kind of engineer-run developer like id, they're more worried about their uncanny valley face animation subroutines than they are with storytelling and the gameplay experience. HL1 was the best shooter ever, because they weren't making playable tech demos back then.
|
Because of this guy:
![[image loading]](http://gaming.freedomblogging.com/files/2009/08/blizzcon-vid230.jpg)
He brought the console concept to the PC market, and boy did he fail hard.
|
Hon is still king in my books!! but this should be awsome considering that icefrog is making it..
|
simple , blizzard sucks ... big time
|
spectate an ongoing game, that sounds SO cool!
|
On November 03 2010 00:00 Senx wrote:Because of this guy: He brought the console concept to the PC market, and boy did he fail hard. God I hate that guy...
|
the main reason is now i think
valve has kept themselves to being fan and gamer centric
blizzard has gone corporate
|
Valve > ActiBlizz for now
|
On November 02 2010 22:57 Tin_Foil wrote:
Ummm... Is it just me or does it sounds like having games be that easy to spectate is just asking for mass cheating??
How many morons are gonna have a friend watching the game? I guess you can just mark every game as private.
DotA has this option right now with Garena and there's been live casting for all of the popular e-sports games for how long now? By your logic, no game should be spectated live for fear of cheating.
|
I love how everyone complains about this shit, yes it could be done, however it would have required them to start from scratch instead of taking the warcraft 3 engine and heavily modifying it which would have added at least a year to the development time.
They decided to go with a system that sent less information over the network, and required less (read almost no) interaction between the player's clients and the servers during the game. Having the ability to reconnect would significantly increase the cost of the servers. HON and DOTA 2 can do it because they don't have anywhere near as many games going on each and every day. From a business standpoint I agree with that. Now I think they also should have included lan which would have solved many of BNets problems
TL:DR There are a bunch of technical, and business reasons they didn't do this, its not because they hate their customers like everyone seems to think
|
On November 02 2010 20:51 dacthehork wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 20:47 Bob Loblaw wrote:
This Q&A is all talk. I'm not saying it's not gonna happen, but right now the only point of this is getting the hype up for DOTA2. So wait & see. no it's not this stuff is all found in HoN so they have to include it in Dota 2 to compete Also it's not hard to implement all of these things (relatively). Blizzard focused entirely on anti piracy with bnet 2.0, everything else was an afterthought. I don't understand how anyone could think bnet 2.0 is a good platform except for the bottom lines. Its entirely 50 steps backwards in every respect but anti-piracy. ANYONE who thinks otherwise is wrong. Bnet 2.0 was entirely created to be an anti piracy measure.For the people who are stupidly wrong above, check out, http://www.heroesofnewerth.com/ And read all the features listed. -Anti Maphack using client/server netcode (it's impossible to maphack) -Reconnecting -Replays database with fastforward/rewind and jump to time -Extensive stat tracking etc. It's 10x better than bnet 2.0 feature wise, and Valve with even more resources will be even better Bnet 2.0 from a client standpoint is terrible, it's only redeeming factor is that it causes SC2 online to not be piratable (so far).
Well, sure SC2 isn't pirateable in multiplayer, but they moved the whole single-player into online mode so that it couldn't be pirated, but there already were single player cracks out before the game was even released. Now, I can't even play the single-player campaign if my internet happens to be cut off.
|
Games built on the source engine are generally pretty awesome (I've been a big TF2 fan). HOWEVER,
1) If you think cheating is bad in SC2, well Valve's anti-cheat mechanism is complete crap. If the game is even halfway successful be prepared for intrusive third-party anti-cheat programs for any reputable leagues and rampant hacking in anything else.
2) I'll believe their new improvements on replay functionality when I see it. It works in TF2, but it's buggy as hell. Also, it's only just recently that they started making an effort not to break replays with every minor update.
|
On November 03 2010 01:13 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 22:57 Tin_Foil wrote:
Ummm... Is it just me or does it sounds like having games be that easy to spectate is just asking for mass cheating??
How many morons are gonna have a friend watching the game? I guess you can just mark every game as private. DotA has this option right now with Garena and there's been live casting for all of the popular e-sports games for how long now? By your logic, no game should be spectated live for fear of cheating.
its going to be a problem if dota2 becomes big and money gets involved, its been done that way for years and its always an issue when doing online games live
its a pretty simple fix though, everybodys fretting over something so dumb just time delay the live games and allow for no spectator option if people really do care about it
|
Greed, which is cleverly wrapped under the guise of piracy protection. Valve, while still a business, has always been keen on not just looking at its consumers as dollar signs. They realize the value of good pr, and know there's a line for how much stupid shit you can pull
|
Cool does this help get rid of the raging angry 12 year olds that plague the dota style communities? Dota 2 can have all the features it wants, it will still be a bunch of very very angry kids screaming at each other in chat.
On a serious tip I expect battlenet to have these types of features in the future. SC2 was built from nothing, engine and all.
|
Reconnect in team games, please, Blizzard. The number of disconnects is unacceptably high, and the lack of reconnect is just awful. I would support this if implemented. Oh, and spectating a game that's in progress (preferably if the lag issues can be removed) would be awesome as well.
|
Guild Wars way back in the day used that spectator function. That was like 7 years ago too. Also I wouldn't want to play with Europe and their probably high pings. Has anyone played LoL with Europe? They're really bad. REALLY BAD.
|
On November 03 2010 01:55 clik wrote:
Cool does this help get rid of the raging angry 12 year olds that plague the dota style communities? Dota 2 can have all the features it wants, it will still be a bunch of very very angry kids screaming at each other in chat.
On a serious tip I expect battlenet to have these types of features in the future. SC2 was built from nothing, engine and all.
WRONG!
SC2 is based on the wc3 engine. Its been heavily modified and upgraded, but they used the WC3 engine as the starting point. Upgrading it to have these features would require a complete rewrite of the net code, and a massive upgrade(both software and hardware) of battle net
In the end you dont really want to change how it handles 1v1s(the important game type) anyway, having a pause screen pop up is much more desirable to just dropping the player, or every player, when they go out of sync. This happens in HON all the time and who ever can rejoin the fastest gets some free damage on any near by players. It would be good that OBS would not affect the players, but the players still need to be 100% in sync at all times regardless.
It would also prob increase the lag from battlenet as you are adding in a bunch of overhead to allow players to rejoin and allow the obs to lag, then catch back up to real time, not to mention the additional strain on the bnet servers from hosting 200,000+ simultaneous games.
If you think bnet lags now, you would blow your brains out if they didn't spend millions on new hardware if they ever changed to this kind of client server model
|
Blizzard better start taking some notes from Valve I think because if Valve were to make an RTS, I feel while gameplay may be questionable due to lack of experience in the genre, secondary features would more than best SC2s.
|
Apples, oranges, nom. But haters gonna hate.
Hey Valve, how's HL Episode 3 coming along?
|
When you join a TF2 game, you're messing around, firing rockets here, switching classes there, teams are getting autobalanced etc. It's great fun, absolutely, but aside from the really top end clan scrims, there's nothing competitive about it. I have no sense that the other team is desperately trying to win so much as both teams are just sort of chilling out and having fun like you might with three buddies when you play smash brothers.
That's great for TF2. But not for DOTA. I want to see a really serious ladder system, not the standard FPS model of having 12 vs. 12 and people just checking through their server browser to find a game they can hop into that valve seems to love on the basis that it "promotes community."
DOTA 2 should be all about eating carebears alive.
Valve delivered ground breaking single player games regarded as some of the best in the industry (Half-Life 1 + 2).
Valve delivered what is arguably the most competitive first person shooter (Counter-Strike).
Valve delivered what some people regard as the best multiplayer experience (TF2).
Valve delivered one of the best first person shooter puzzle games of all time (Portal).
They've got a lot of experience in many different places, I think they're aware of how you can't structure different games in the same way.
|
On November 03 2010 02:35 lowkontrast wrote:Show nested quote +When you join a TF2 game, you're messing around, firing rockets here, switching classes there, teams are getting autobalanced etc. It's great fun, absolutely, but aside from the really top end clan scrims, there's nothing competitive about it. I have no sense that the other team is desperately trying to win so much as both teams are just sort of chilling out and having fun like you might with three buddies when you play smash brothers.
That's great for TF2. But not for DOTA. I want to see a really serious ladder system, not the standard FPS model of having 12 vs. 12 and people just checking through their server browser to find a game they can hop into that valve seems to love on the basis that it "promotes community."
DOTA 2 should be all about eating carebears alive. Valve delivered ground breaking single player games regarded as some of the best in the industry (Half-Life 1 + 2). Valve delivered what is arguably the most competitive first person shooter (Counter-Strike). Valve delivered what some people regard as the best multiplayer experience (TF2). Valve delivered one of the best first person shooter puzzle games of all time (Portal). They've got a lot of experience in many different places, I think they're aware of how you can't structure different games in the same way.
I hate to break it to you (and I love Valve) but,
Valve didn't create counter-strike.
Valve didn't create team fortress (although they did make TF2, a very casual, but fun, shooter).
Valve didn't create portal.
|
On November 03 2010 02:50 trainRiderJ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2010 02:35 lowkontrast wrote:When you join a TF2 game, you're messing around, firing rockets here, switching classes there, teams are getting autobalanced etc. It's great fun, absolutely, but aside from the really top end clan scrims, there's nothing competitive about it. I have no sense that the other team is desperately trying to win so much as both teams are just sort of chilling out and having fun like you might with three buddies when you play smash brothers.
That's great for TF2. But not for DOTA. I want to see a really serious ladder system, not the standard FPS model of having 12 vs. 12 and people just checking through their server browser to find a game they can hop into that valve seems to love on the basis that it "promotes community."
DOTA 2 should be all about eating carebears alive. Valve delivered ground breaking single player games regarded as some of the best in the industry (Half-Life 1 + 2). Valve delivered what is arguably the most competitive first person shooter (Counter-Strike). Valve delivered what some people regard as the best multiplayer experience (TF2). Valve delivered one of the best first person shooter puzzle games of all time (Portal). They've got a lot of experience in many different places, I think they're aware of how you can't structure different games in the same way. I hate to break it to you (and I love Valve) but, Valve didn't create counter-strike. Valve didn't create team fortress (although they did make TF2, a very casual, but fun, shooter). Valve didn't create portal.
Valve created Portal (but not the concept, although they hired the people who did). And they hired pretty much everyone who was instrumental in creating TF & CS, so they may as well have.
|
On November 03 2010 02:50 trainRiderJ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2010 02:35 lowkontrast wrote:When you join a TF2 game, you're messing around, firing rockets here, switching classes there, teams are getting autobalanced etc. It's great fun, absolutely, but aside from the really top end clan scrims, there's nothing competitive about it. I have no sense that the other team is desperately trying to win so much as both teams are just sort of chilling out and having fun like you might with three buddies when you play smash brothers.
That's great for TF2. But not for DOTA. I want to see a really serious ladder system, not the standard FPS model of having 12 vs. 12 and people just checking through their server browser to find a game they can hop into that valve seems to love on the basis that it "promotes community."
DOTA 2 should be all about eating carebears alive. Valve delivered ground breaking single player games regarded as some of the best in the industry (Half-Life 1 + 2). Valve delivered what is arguably the most competitive first person shooter (Counter-Strike). Valve delivered what some people regard as the best multiplayer experience (TF2). Valve delivered one of the best first person shooter puzzle games of all time (Portal). They've got a lot of experience in many different places, I think they're aware of how you can't structure different games in the same way. I hate to break it to you (and I love Valve) but, Valve didn't create counter-strike. Valve didn't create team fortress (although they did make TF2, a very casual, but fun, shooter). Valve didn't create portal.
I hate to break it to you, but Valve isn't creating Dota 2 either, so the comparison stands.
Note I also mentioned that they delivered those games. Did they not?
|
All three were mods or independent projects which Valve later picked up. Acquiring a company isn't quite the same as coming up with the ideas on your own. There is inevitably turnover, office politics/drama, etc which can lead to trouble.
That said, I think Valve has made some great games and, arguably, an even better game service in Steam. I would list their strengths as
1) Strong narrative and story-telling
2) Intuitive game concepts
3) PR
However I think they have two main weaknesses that a lot of you criticize Blizzard for as well
1) Weak anti-cheat measures
2) Technical programming/QA/QC. Specifically net code as compared to the Quake series, but also other engine bugs that constantly come up through frequent updates to the engine.
|
On November 02 2010 12:54 Lunares wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 12:47 TheYango wrote:
It's been discussed that in a game centered around 1v1, reconnect isn't practical. Spending a minute out of 45 minutes is a slight, but not terrible disadvantage in a MOBA. A minute disconnected in a 1v1 SC2 game is basically an unwinnable advantage, except in situations where the person remaining in game was already ridiculously behind.. I think that SC2 should at least allow the possiblity, eg don't drop the opponent from the game unless the player still in agrees to it. That way in tournies if one player gets dc'd then they can rejoin the game without restarting. Also same thing for casting/shoutcasting. Don't have to be in the game when it starts to join and spectate.
The ideal would be a tournament mode, where the game automatically pauses when someone drops, and then has option to continue after both players are ready... makes sense.. I mean optimally we all play on lan, but there are still times when people drop on lan due to network problems
also... as far as online ladder is concerned, the reconnect is not practical, I agree.
|
Some of these features create problems for a game such as SC2. For example being able to observe random ladder games could promote cheating.
On the other hand I am curious as to why DOTA 2 is confident they will have no lag with a large amount of observers and Battle.net has trouble 1v1.
|
On November 03 2010 03:55 kxr1der wrote:
Some of these features create problems for a game such as SC2. For example being able to observe random ladder games could promote cheating.
On the other hand I am curious as to why DOTA 2 is confident they will have no lag with a large amount of observers and Battle.net has trouble 1v1.
I think its probably due to the way how the game engine is designed. Dota 2 is going to use the source engine so implementing something like HLTV into the game should be ezpz. The record for simultaneous record for viewers on one game for HLTV is like 40k viewers.
|
Why do I feel like I'm the only one who understands this?
First of all, SC2's reconnect feature would only be useful in 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4. In 1v1, you would have to look at the reconnect screen, until your opponent comes back. In games like HoN, or LoL, or DotA, if someone is gone for a few minutes, it doesn't make that big of a difference, because they can just chill at the fountain while waiting to reconnect. In a 1v1 game, you can't just continue playing, you have to wait for opponent to come back. Even in 2v2's and up, it still might not work that well.
SC2's replay system is the way it is because it has to watch and collect data not just from 10 units, but from EVERY unit. Every replay that is recorded has a data output that can literally tell Blizzard which unit walked for how many steps. The amount of information they can collect with Bnet 2.0 is... out of control. That's why it's an always connected experience, because they're collecting all this neat data to be able to fix the game faster. This in turn, gives us a slightly flawed replay system, which works for the most part. Trying to rewind is kind of a huge pain in the ass, but I'm not really too worried about it.
Now, the observing a game mid-progress.... technically is just a fault. I'm not going to defend that, because I believe Blizzard COULD do it, but they need to find a way to do it without giving people the ability to cheat. If they allow open connections on a game, just think of the disasters that may come because of it. Eventually, they'll find a way that minimizes cheating.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
