NightEnd vs Zenio was totally a pc problem. 200-200 armies and lag starts exactly when stalkers blink under broodlords, no question. Also the visible timeout lasted only a couple of seconds which is in my opinion more of a pc problem, not connection problem.
Even when you try your very best, such things will happen. In the end, lag is a part of esports, whether you like it or not. People should always keep in mind that people who organize such events are always trying their best to make it succesfull event for everyone, but things can go wrong. Accept it.
On January 20 2012 07:48 gulati wrote: You have my support Carmac.
I seriously just hope Blizzard pulls their equity-driven ego's out of their asses and realize that without LAN support for any and ALL tournaments, there will never, ever, ever, EVER be a chance to have SC2 televised. EVER.
Good luck with the rest of the tournament, and if anybody from Blizzard is reading: There's a reason I switched to SWTOR and back to Brood War.
What about LoL? No LAN required...
They aren't on bnet 2.0. I don't want this to seem like a low blow but tbh they are on different infrastructures.
On January 20 2012 07:02 Flonomenalz wrote: lol guys nightend was still 2-3 bases against what, 4-5 base? nightned still had nearly no money compared to like 5k bank for zenio? i mean zenio played badly, but nightend made mistakes too, and even though he would have won that battle, i still doubt he wins the game.
still, that doesn't excuse the lag, but I feel for IEM, there's only so much you can do.
Blizzard is the biggest culprit, I don't know and still don't know why they refuse LAN support.
NO developer is going to be using LAN, look at any AAA title in the last three years, none of them have a DRM free LAN, you simply cannot afford to do it in this day and age, I wish I remember the link but at the Game Developers Conference a developer was giving a seminar on why companies wont be doing LAN unless multiple things change. Honestly DO NOT expect Lan, it will NEVER come, so yes you can "blame" blizzard but nothing is going to change
tl:dr, LAN = less control, expect NO developer to offer it in the near future
why dont blizzard to something like the quake live guys do.
they send some guys over that host the lan mode on their server at the event and take it with them when the tournaments over. it would be a system that would be just fine for larger tournaments or GSL e.g.
I have no idea how it is possible in this day and age for them to be running an event on computers that can't run SC2 at reasonable settings without lag in 1v1...
But credit to carmac for acknowledging the fuck up.
so how come only Zenio and Nightend need a regame? Seems a bit unfair. At least make it a BO5 with score 2-1. Carmac, here's your chance to make things better...
On January 20 2012 07:02 Flonomenalz wrote: lol guys nightend was still 2-3 bases against what, 4-5 base? nightned still had nearly no money compared to like 5k bank for zenio? i mean zenio played badly, but nightend made mistakes too, and even though he would have won that battle, i still doubt he wins the game.
still, that doesn't excuse the lag, but I feel for IEM, there's only so much you can do.
Blizzard is the biggest culprit, I don't know and still don't know why they refuse LAN support.
NO developer is going to be using LAN, look at any AAA title in the last three years, none of them have a DRM free LAN, you simply cannot afford to do it in this day and age, I wish I remember the link but at the Game Developers Conference a developer was giving a seminar on why companies wont be doing LAN unless multiple things change. Honestly DO NOT expect Lan, it will NEVER come, so yes you can "blame" blizzard but nothing is going to change
tl:dr, LAN = less control, expect NO developer to offer it in the near future
That's the thing, they don't need to do regular Lan. They could make a "battlenet in a box" type server with clients that ONLY work on it and nothing else. Then just have 3 or 4 of these available upon request in each region for major lan events (and charge a reasonable fee for setup and to have security for them, a blizzard employee who operates it and ensures no outside party has access to the server) It would basically just be a way to take the internet out of the equation and at the same time ensure Blizzard maintains the level of control they currently have. The bottom line is that Blizzard is hurting their own bottom line by having so many fail-full events due to these kinds of issues. It's got to be really hard for newcomers to take esports seriously when they see this kind of stuff. Starcraft 2's long term growth and demand is directly related to the success it has in esports. I lost count 6 months ago of how many major events have had serious problems due to the necessity of play being done through the internet. The fact that they haven't addressed this issue and setup some kind of closed server for tournament says to me that Blizzard doesn't really care, half as much as they claim to, about E-Sports.
I was a little bit uncertain as to whether it was B.net's fault or if it was the computer's fault for the lag, but could this be fixed were there a LAN option for StarCraft 2? And if so I really wish that Blizzard could release a LAN variant of the game even if it were to be given only to big tournaments (GSL, DreamHack, IEM, MLG, etc.).
Everything that I've read about seems to be a bit ambiguous, but did NightEnD only start complaining about the lag after the game, or did he request the rematch at the time that he was lagging. Also the actual effect of the lag needs to be taken into account, as I believe it was Kennigit who tweeted that Zenio was on 5 base vs 2 base and was floating something like ~2000 minerals. At that point I find it hard to believe that lag had much of a factor into NightEnD's play.
I think something like that--that is if you're going to give rematches--should be handled like a challenge in a tennis match, where the player must immediately make the request as soon as the "game-changing" lag occurs. Then the game should be paused, have the tournament evaluate the situation, discover the validity of the situation, and either resume the game or offer the rematch.
Everything surrounding this seems really convoluted, but I'm happy to see Carmac standing by his guns and trying to help clarify the situation. Thank you very much.
I'm with the verdict that the problems are because of crappy computers, it's funny that they're trying to blame it on lack of LAN when the hardware can't even handle 1v1 200 supply armies.
EDIT: Wait, they're complaining about lag with tons of observers that aren't there at the tournament? What a joke
On January 20 2012 07:02 Flonomenalz wrote: lol guys nightend was still 2-3 bases against what, 4-5 base? nightned still had nearly no money compared to like 5k bank for zenio? i mean zenio played badly, but nightend made mistakes too, and even though he would have won that battle, i still doubt he wins the game.
still, that doesn't excuse the lag, but I feel for IEM, there's only so much you can do.
Blizzard is the biggest culprit, I don't know and still don't know why they refuse LAN support.
NO developer is going to be using LAN, look at any AAA title in the last three years, none of them have a DRM free LAN, you simply cannot afford to do it in this day and age, I wish I remember the link but at the Game Developers Conference a developer was giving a seminar on why companies wont be doing LAN unless multiple things change. Honestly DO NOT expect Lan, it will NEVER come, so yes you can "blame" blizzard but nothing is going to change
tl:dr, LAN = less control, expect NO developer to offer it in the near future
Valve titles always have had and still have LAN. You just need to get through steam login, and you are done.