|
Sweden33719 Posts
http://www.starcraft-source.com/index.php?cmd=media&sec=video&bcpid=&bclid=1740033618&bctid=1851181479
Because it's such a substantial video I feel like it deserves its own thread, they talk about replays, rewinding (and actually discuss the save-point feature we've discussed a lot on here) and some BNet features, among many other things.
Chris Sigaty and Samwise Didier answering questions for about 35 min or so. I'll rewatch it and make some bullet points I think, hopefully I misheard what they said about the beta not being before 2009 ;(
CHRISTMAS BETA PLZ!
- No replay rewinding, experimenting with save-points that you can jump between.
- Will have multicore and 64bit support (32 bit engine but compatible)
- Looking into the possiblity of exporting replays into video content.
- Deliberate attempts have been made to allow for DotA (and other custom game types) to move onto SC2, along with the option of ladder/AMM support should a specific game type become popular.
- Part of the editor might be in the beta.
- New units will be added in each expansion for multiplayer.
- Will have tutorials for the various races apart from the campaign.
- Editor will allow you to edit things directly via scripting (uh sorry if this is phrased poorly, I don't know much about this stuff)
- Intergrated WaaaghTV is being considered for Battle.net
- AMM will try to match players up with players close to you in location (if I understood what they said correctly).
- Gamespeed in the Blizzcon build was one step below fastest.
- Beta will initially be closed, with servers located in the US. Select participants will be invited from China/Korea/Europe etc.
- Beta will NOT be in 2008. Blizzard just recently got the whole company playing SC2.
- There will probably be at least 1 year between the release of the game/expansions, and most likely more.
|
OMG CANDY! :D
Thanks FA! /bowbow
|
Germany2896 Posts
That savepoints work in replays mean that there save/loadgame mechanism is working 100% correctly, which is a thing I really admire as in my experience savin/loading games is quite difficult in modern OOP games and they do it perfectly.
Rewind replay is of course not working, but the bookmarks/savepoints are more than I was expecting.
Now we only need more statistical informations in the replays, so that the bwchart style programs work better(including the gameversion) and some kind of mechanism to find the correct map if they don't embed it in the replay itself.
|
Nice nice thanks!
Started watching now.
|
|
|
Did he just say there's no more fastest speed, and that it's just faster now? I'm not sure I understood that part correctly.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
No, he said the blizzcon build was played at one step below fastest.
|
On October 13 2008 01:54 FrozenArbiter wrote:
No, he said the blizzcon build was played at one step below fastest.
Oh, that's interresting, because I read from people who played it that supposedly the speed felt about the same as SC1. So maybe SC2 faster = SC1 fastest? So long as they don't slow it down it's fine by me. If they speed it up even more it would be awesome.
|
|
|
Sweden33719 Posts
It's a program for broadcasting live games within the WC3 engine.
|
If you leave it running after the Q&A there's a SC2 artwork Q&A with Samwise Diddier which is very interresting.
They're going into details about changes to graphics, tilesets and unit readability (like how terran infantry units being hard to distinguish from eachother is problematic right now).
|
Sweden33719 Posts
It's from WWI tho, so it's old.
|
Ah, well I hadn't seen it before so it's new to me.
|
WaaaghTV is liek HLTV for CS 1.6. That's perfect news, but I don't think the Korean leagues are gonna adopt it.
|
I dont get the Dota thing.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Uhm as far as I understood it, they've tried to make sure that you'll be able to re-create DotA or at least a similiar game in the SC2 engine. Since the game doesn't have heroes or inventories etc I imagine they had to implement solutions for that.
The ladder comment I took to mean that they'll have the infrastructure of bnet setup in such a way so as to easily enable them to add AMM or Ladder support for custom game types (such as DotA).
|
Glad their including tutorials for all 3 races since there's only the Terran campaign. I hope its advanced enough to get new players minds 'thinking' Zerg or Protoss without the practice that a campaign offers.
Is WaaaghTV free in WC3?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Yes WaaaghTV is free, but you need WC3 to use it.
They said something about having tutorials with increasingly difficult AI opponents too iirc.
|
That is pretty cool, Xeris said that the AI can get pretty tough at higher levels. Should be much better practice then comp stomping is in BW.
|
United States20666 Posts
Ha I was right about faster speed~
/preens.
|
Seriously, someone from TL.net needs to put their foot down at one of these events about BNET latency. Someone asked them about the bnet latency problems and the guy responded as if it was an actual distance issue between both clients. The problem is with the Bnet architecture, even if you host a game on BNet, there is still about 200-500 ms of delay added in both SC and WC3, and GGC/Hamachi/VCK/Lat Changers gets rid of this delay. If the Russians from Iccup can emulate a BW server, have better anti-hack features, and provided 0 server delay, then there's no reason Bnet servers should have this natural delay, ESPECIALLY IN CUSTOM GAMES which are 100% peer 2 peer. I can't believe they've avoided this question/problem for years.
|
Bold loses its emphasis when applied to the entire body of text.
Edit: but in all fairness you're right. They need to address it (and I'm sure they will!, it's fine in war3 as far as im aware)
|
On October 13 2008 12:05 lwstupidus wrote:
Seriously, someone from TL.net needs to put their foot down at one of these events about BNET latency. Someone asked them about the bnet latency problems and the guy responded as if it was an actual distance issue between both clients. The problem is with the Bnet architecture, even if you host a game on BNet, there is still about 200-500 ms of delay added in both SC and WC3, and GGC/Hamachi/VCK/Lat Changers gets rid of this delay. If the Russians from Iccup can emulate a BW server, have better anti-hack features, and provided 0 server delay, then there's no reason Bnet servers should have this natural delay, ESPECIALLY IN CUSTOM GAMES. I can't believe they've avoided this question/problem for years.
When Starcraft was released it could only support such latency because of the average user being on 56k at best. If they sprung for Lan latency then nobody would have been able to play eachother due to Latency issues.
It's not a Bnet issue. It's a limitation they put in. They didn't realistcally expected it to be an issue. I can almost guarantee that the new battle net will have better latency. Also, yeah, learn2boldtastefully.
|
On October 13 2008 12:05 lwstupidus wrote:
Seriously, someone from TL.net needs to put their foot down at one of these events about BNET latency. Someone asked them about the bnet latency problems and the guy responded as if it was an actual distance issue between both clients. The problem is with the Bnet architecture, even if you host a game on BNet, there is still about 200-500 ms of delay added in both SC and WC3, and GGC/Hamachi/VCK/Lat Changers gets rid of this delay. If the Russians from Iccup can emulate a BW server, have better anti-hack features, and provided 0 server delay, then there's no reason Bnet servers should have this natural delay, ESPECIALLY IN CUSTOM GAMES. I can't believe they've avoided this question/problem for years.
Pleaseeeeeeeee don't bring up antihack, notice how wc3 has no ladders outside of bnet except for the premier leagues that are basically for the top teams? SC's antihack wasn't updated or built as well wc3's so seriously that is a terrible point. Play both games before talking about them.
As far as the delay, well the hell if I know they don't like answering questions directly...ever.
|
On October 13 2008 10:03 FrozenArbiter wrote:
The ladder comment I took to mean that they'll have the infrastructure of bnet setup in such a way so as to easily enable them to add AMM or Ladder support for custom game types (such as DotA).
Getting your own ladders/tournaments hosted by B-net is probably one of the new features which will cost money.
|
On October 13 2008 01:11 FrozenArbiter wrote:
New units will be added in each expansion for multiplayer.
I really dislike that though! The rest seems pretty good actually! I'm looking forward to play.. OMG NEED BETA KEY
|
On October 13 2008 12:53 Nintu wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2008 12:05 lwstupidus wrote:
Seriously, someone from TL.net needs to put their foot down at one of these events about BNET latency. Someone asked them about the bnet latency problems and the guy responded as if it was an actual distance issue between both clients. The problem is with the Bnet architecture, even if you host a game on BNet, there is still about 200-500 ms of delay added in both SC and WC3, and GGC/Hamachi/VCK/Lat Changers gets rid of this delay. If the Russians from Iccup can emulate a BW server, have better anti-hack features, and provided 0 server delay, then there's no reason Bnet servers should have this natural delay, ESPECIALLY IN CUSTOM GAMES. I can't believe they've avoided this question/problem for years. When Starcraft was released it could only support such latency because of the average user being on 56k at best. If they sprung for Lan latency then nobody would have been able to play eachother due to Latency issues. It's not a Bnet issue. It's a limitation they put in. They didn't realistcally expected it to be an issue. I can almost guarantee that the new battle net will have better latency. Also, yeah, learn2boldtastefully.
Your point is moot because it is a problem in War3 as well which obviously came out long after 56ks were dominant. If it's a limitation they put in that wasn't only delegated to online play, then it would be a problem on LAN, which it is not. So basically you just responded with no useful, relevant, or factual information...
SC's antihack wasn't updated or built as well wc3's so seriously that is a terrible point. Play both games before talking about them.
What the hell are you talking about, that wasn't my point at all. WC3 has no working anti-hack either (disc hack released 1 day after newest patch), so why don't you learn to read and play both games before talking about them, because I actually do play both of them.
|
On October 13 2008 17:12 lwstupidus wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2008 12:53 Nintu wrote:On October 13 2008 12:05 lwstupidus wrote:
Seriously, someone from TL.net needs to put their foot down at one of these events about BNET latency. Someone asked them about the bnet latency problems and the guy responded as if it was an actual distance issue between both clients. The problem is with the Bnet architecture, even if you host a game on BNet, there is still about 200-500 ms of delay added in both SC and WC3, and GGC/Hamachi/VCK/Lat Changers gets rid of this delay. If the Russians from Iccup can emulate a BW server, have better anti-hack features, and provided 0 server delay, then there's no reason Bnet servers should have this natural delay, ESPECIALLY IN CUSTOM GAMES. I can't believe they've avoided this question/problem for years. When Starcraft was released it could only support such latency because of the average user being on 56k at best. If they sprung for Lan latency then nobody would have been able to play eachother due to Latency issues. It's not a Bnet issue. It's a limitation they put in. They didn't realistcally expected it to be an issue. I can almost guarantee that the new battle net will have better latency. Also, yeah, learn2boldtastefully. Your point is moot because it is a problem in War3 as well which obviously came out long after 56ks were dominant. If it's a limitation they put in that wasn't only delegated to online play, then it would be a problem on LAN, which it is not. So basically you just responded with no useful, relevant, or factual information... Show nested quote +SC's antihack wasn't updated or built as well wc3's so seriously that is a terrible point. Play both games before talking about them. What the hell are you talking about, that wasn't my point at all. WC3 has no working anti-hack either (disc hack released 1 day after newest patch), so why don't you learn to read and play both games before talking about them, because I actually do play both of them.
They setup lan differently to run at a much lower latency. They did this because, as it turns out, Lanned computers are connected directly to eachother, which makes for much faster speeds. This is why you need Hamachi. Since these modern connections can now achieve Lan like speeds, Hamachi tricks your computer into thinking you're Lanned with them. Using the Lan protocol gives access to lower latency games(Because as mentioned, Lan was setup to play with very low compensation for latency). This is precisely why people would always use hamachi for serious events, until the recent latency changer.
Battle net is entirely unrelated to this. You seem to think that every packet goes through battle.net which causes this lag on battle.net. Have you ever lost your connection to battle.net but still magically stayed in the game? What? Your latency didn't get any better either?
When the game begins, it's just you and the player. That Lag isn't battle net. That lag is coding that blizzard implemented to make multiplayer at all possible during 56k years.
I'm glad I could be of help.
(I'm sure someone can give you a better explanation but I hope this helped you none-the-less.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
