🚀 go-pugleaf

Man-wai Chang ToDie wrote:
> Will SC2 care about poor users?
> 

Blizzard would not shoot themselves in the foot by forcing people to
have high throughput to play the game.  While most people (ahem, gamers)
in the USA have upgraded to higher speed connections, there are still
many millions of potential customers around the world who can't either
because of cost or availability.

As always, you will still need a low latency connection to play.

--
LTP

:)

IN TEH PALECE KNOWEN AS alt.games.starcraft, TEH FAGGORTER Luc The
Perverse <ataylor_no_spa_am@_letterC_solutions.n3t> DUMPED HIS GHEYE
SHIET ON MY COMPUTAR SCREEN!!!!:
>Man-wai Chang ToDie wrote:
>> Will SC2 care about poor users?
>> 
>
>Blizzard would not shoot themselves in the foot by forcing people to
>have high throughput to play the game.  While most people (ahem, gamers)
>in the USA have upgraded to higher speed connections, there are still
>many millions of potential customers around the world who can't either
>because of cost or availability.
>
>As always, you will still need a low latency connection to play.

Eh, I'd say the majority of people who are the potential target
audience have at least some form of DSL/Cable. Things change in 10
years, you know - I honestly don't think dial-up users are of much
concern to anyone making multiplayer games in this day and age. If it
works on dial-up, well, good for them, but it should be optimized for
mainstream connections and not the lowest common demeanor - Which, in
this day and age, means either low-end DSL or Cable.

Basically the only real reason to stick with dial-up these days is if
you're living so out in the boonies that it is your only option due to
technical constraints.

> Basically the only real reason to stick with dial-up these days is if
> you're living so out in the boonies that it is your only option due to
> technical constraints.

How about defining the number of players when hosting a game?

-- 
   @~@   Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
  / v \  Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
/( _ )\ (Xubuntu 7.04)  Linux 2.6.23.9
   ^ ^   21:32:01 up 2 days 4:27 0 users load average: 1.06 1.10 1.03
? ? (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa/

IN TEH PALECE KNOWEN AS alt.games.starcraft, TEH FAGGORTER Man-wai
Chang ToDie <toylet...@gmail.com> DUMPED HIS GHEYE SHIET ON MY
COMPUTAR SCREEN!!!!:
>> Basically the only real reason to stick with dial-up these days is if
>> you're living so out in the boonies that it is your only option due to
>> technical constraints.
>
>How about defining the number of players when hosting a game?

You can do that in SC already?

All I am saying is that if you're optimizing the game for dial-up
performance you're taking something away from everyone who's not
limited to dial-up, due to the Peer-to-peer architecture of SC
multiplayer (as opposed to a client-server one like in Quake and
virtually every other FPS). 

And unlike in 1998, that would be the vast, vast majority of the
player base - So it'd be a retarded decision to make.