Required server demos for all matches

Before you say "bew", I realize this would be a huge step for the tribes community to take and definatly not one that will come easily; so, hear my argument before you comment plz...

Some background: (skip if you know what it is)
A server demo is a demo of everything in the server, it's a feature that is either very likely to be included or has already been included (not sure) and comes with the unreal engine. I don't know for sure obviously, but they would probably have a means of observing just a single player thus they would eclipse the usefulness of individual demos meaning there would probably be no need to store personal demos. They would probably be at least a few times larger--if that's a problem, keep them for less time.

The primary argument against this is probably that peeps want to keep secrets. While that makes sense for the current tribes players and people that want to stay on top of their respective ladders, there's a question that must be answered:

Is secrecy good for the game?

There are two big reasons why I'm going to say no:

First: Competition
When T2 was first released there were no demos and even after demos became available most top teams would not release them. Now, we all know what the competition on that ladder looked like--it was stagnant. Some might blame this on a skill difference or the speed of base's gameplay; however, I think it was more about teams just not knowing what to expect in their matches and thus the game evolved VERY slowly. Once demos started comming out things did speed up--if it had continued like that the game would probably be dead (if you think it's dead now, then deader). Now, let's look at what the competition in T1's hay-day was like (note: I was not there, this is what I've heard)... demos were readily available, the pace of the game's evolution was much faster, there were upsets, the ladder was not stagnant, people were more excited about their matches.

My second reason: New players
I'm one of those people that watches a lot of demos, I find them entertaining, I learn new tricks, I get an idea of how different people play, and I believe I'm a better player because of it. Even now a days I still learn something new from a demo from time to time. If someone like me can benefit from watching demos, then how much more does a new player benefit?

Stealing of strategies is obviously going to be one of the big things people are going to comment on. There's a big difference between understanding a strategy and being able to execute it, each team has different skill sets and what's effective for one team is likely not for another--teams must at the minimum edit them to fit the team for them to be effective--they have to find out what works for them. Besides, if you can't figure out what a team's strategy is from a few people's individual demos then you aren't smart enough to be able to understand a strategy now matter what kind of demos you have.

As my final argument, look at it this way...
The operator of whatever server you play on is going to have the server demo and thus anyone they choose to give it to will also have the demo. Therefore, might as well even the playing field.

As for difficulties transfering those demos, that's not a problem a little ingenuity and effort can't solve.

It would also obviously be a great anti-cheating tool.

P.S.
I know yer comming Val and I know you don't agree, let's try to keep the posts in reasonable quantities though, eh?
Post edited by GIMPbeowulf at 2/24/2004 2:40:21 PM

We should link to the TribesTalk thread.. lot of good stuff.. Although, I'd be interested in hearing from TWL'ers that don't frequent TW.
Post edited by KillerONE at 2/24/2004 2:42:03 PM

Honestly i'm all for the server side demo stuff... for many reasons (many of which gimp went into)... i don't see how knowing another teams strat can make the game bad... seriously, it's more than a strat that beats another team, regardless of how closely matched they are skillwise, a lot of it is dumb luck sometimes, and sometimes it's communication, sometimes it's just not your night... i think anything we can do to level the playing field all around and make it that much harder for a #1 to stay number 1 or even become number one in the first place, is a very good thing.

the only bad thing I see of this is scrims.

Team A scrims Team C. Team C gives the Demo to Team B, Team B then changes their strat to hhandle the opposition.

Their's no real way to regulate that anyway. I think serverside demos are a great idea. My only concern would be sucking it up in a match, an having every one see it. I only post demos where I do really well "which is why I almost never post one".
--------------------
Carpo Vexillum

bew

Edit: I read it now and seems like a good idea .
Post edited by Magus Kyros at 3/2/2004 7:28:30 PM

Originally posted by: n0rstar
the only bad thing I see of this is scrims.

Team A scrims Team C. Team C gives the Demo to Team B, Team B then changes their strat to hhandle the opposition.

As ugly as that would be, and of course it would happen at some point or another, teams don't simply win matches because of a strategy. If you know a team's strat it will only get you so far, once they catch on you then have to be able to adjust to do anything productive once they make a shift in strategy.

Tribes is more about versatility and adaptation than strategy, and a team that can adjust on the fly will beat another team team even if their opponent knows what they came into the match planning to do.

At this point I think we can be fairly sure the server side demos will be a feature. Therefore it seems rather pointless to fret about those things, playing on a neutral server with a trusted administrator would be about the only solution and I don't think peeps are willing to go that far for scrim security.

So I guess what I'm saying is they're almost surely going to be a feature so might as well get past that and move on.

Originally posted by: GIMPbeowulf
The primary argument against this is probably that peeps want to keep secrets. While that makes sense for the current tribes players and people that want to stay on top of their respective ladders, there's a question that must be answered:

Is secrecy good for the game?

The only question that should be asked is, why in the flying fuck would we want to turn this into some crappyass fps like UT2k4? You totally remove the element of having SMART players, not in just real-time, but in the "ideas" of what to do.

First: Competition
When T2 was first released there were no demos and even after demos became available most top teams would not release them. Now, we all know what the competition on that ladder looked like--it was stagnant. Some might blame this on a skill difference or the speed of base's gameplay;

The reason it was slow, is because it was never fast. Server-side demos don't change gameplay, and they definitely don't get bugs/problems with games, fixed.

however, I think it was more about teams just not knowing what to expect in their matches and thus the game evolved VERY slowly. Once demos started comming out things did speed up--if it had continued like that the game would probably be dead (if you think it's dead now, then deader). Now, let's look at what the competition in T1's hay-day was like (note: I was not there, this is what I've heard)... demos were readily available, the pace of the game's evolution was much faster, there were upsets, the ladder was not stagnant, people were more excited about their matches.

That's because T1 base wasn't T2 base. T1 base was faster-paced, fun gameplay, WITHOUT all the bugs/problems. T2 base is slow, worthless, newbified, and had problems so bad, some people never actually got the game working. I don't know if you know this or not, but that's a SERIOUS hit to the "community" and ESPECIALLY to its ladders.

My second reason: New players
I'm one of those people that watches a lot of demos, I find them entertaining, I learn new tricks, I get an idea of how different people play, and I believe I'm a better player because of it. Even now a days I still learn something new from a demo from time to time. If someone like me can benefit from watching demos, then how much more does a new player benefit?

Who cares how much a new player benefits? I care about my competition. I want my competition to stay on a level of skills AND smarts, not some fuckn newb watching some demo, and copying a route because he's too slow to come up with it on his own. Tribes didn't have demos for "the gameplay". It's an extra feature, meaning that if a demo is released.. GREAT, but demos shouldn't be anywhere even CLOSE to competition (except client-side personal demos == required).

Stealing of strategies is obviously going to be one of the big things people are going to comment on. There's a big difference between understanding a strategy and being able to execute it, each team has different skill sets and what's effective for one team is likely not for another--teams must at the minimum edit them to fit the team for them to be effective--they have to find out what works for them. Besides, if you can't figure out what a team's strategy is from a few people's individual demos then you aren't smart enough to be able to understand a strategy now matter what kind of demos you have.

Who says for sure that ANYONE is going to release demos? I can't speak for every team, but I know when I scrim... it's normally to test out a strat/idea/new map (unless were just havin fun). It would hurt the hell out of us if someone gave demos away (which I know, happens). Now, I don't think anyone needs to point out to BLATENTLY obvious "you have to EXECUTE the strat, not just know it", of course... and you have to breathe oxygen to live and be able to play the game. It doesn't take a rocket scientist of a player to watch a server-side demo and watch every single route/play/position another team does, and slightly adjust to it.

As my final argument, look at it this way...
The operator of whatever server you play on is going to have the server demo and thus anyone they choose to give it to will also have the demo. Therefore, might as well even the playing field.

Yea right.. I can only imagine that.

TeamC: "Hey, uhh... buddybuddyTeamA, we're playing TeamB next week.. you mind sending me the SSD from your match?"
TeamA replies: "Sure buddy.. one sec" (DCCed)
--------(later on that week)--------
TeamB: "Hey TeamA, were playing TeamC this week, you mind sending me the SSD from your match with them?"
TeamA replies: "uhh.. sorry, we deleted it"
OR
TeamA replies: "no, fuck off" (then proceeds to make a post about how cheap TeamB is for asking for the SSD)

Talk about the OPPOSITE of "even". If SSDs were required for competition, TWL would have to be the mediator, and have to REQUIRE uploaded SSDs from every match that records SSDs. (yea right)

As for difficulties transfering those demos, that's not a problem a little ingenuity and effort can't solve.

See Norstar's post. Then realize, that someone would have to publically host these "public" demos. I don't think TWL would be up for hosting 5/10 30MB demos every night from several matches (that's an extreme understatement btw, there would be a lot more than that). I wouldn't trust any other "3rd party" to host the demo.

It would also obviously be a great anti-cheating tool.

Punkbuster and required client-side demos will work fine. They also don't break someone's privacy while playing. Not everyone wants every single action "publically (or more accurately: 'selectively') available".

P.S. I know yer comming Val and I know you don't agree, let's try to keep the posts in reasonable quantities though, eh?

Of course I'm coming.. I'm vehemently against turning T:V into some stupidass newbie fps like UT2k4.

the asshole of the tribes community

Originally posted by: GIMPbeowulf
At this point I think we can be fairly sure the server side demos will be a feature. Therefore it seems rather pointless to fret about those things, playing on a neutral server with a trusted administrator would be about the only solution and I don't think peeps are willing to go that far for scrim security.

So I guess what I'm saying is they're almost surely going to be a feature so might as well get past that and move on.

Yes, it will be a feature... but it will be visible to the players, and TWL will decide whether the server will be demoing in matches. Therefore I'm against SSDs.

the asshole of the tribes community

So with these server demos can you watch individuals? The strat thing kinda blows but as smaq said adjustment/awareness is what makes the better team win in the end usually because the 2 teams are trying to force eachother to fall into their gameplan and/or adjust accordingly. If you can watch individuals though I think that'd kinda suck as you'd really piss off the capper/HO or whomever that spent hours/days making a really sweet route.

this is a a crazy idea, devs already talked about this months ago and it just wasnt gonna work if my memory serves me
BLOODY

I think that's a great idea.. server demo.. that way, teams playing a match in their own server can't hack.

how would that catch hackers?? do you think a server can handle demos of all like 20 something players all at once??? how much memory do you think the game takes up without this little feature

Originally posted by: Validuz
The reason it was slow, is because it was never fast. Server-side demos don't change gameplay, and they definitely don't get bugs/problems with games, fixed. (...) T1 base was faster-paced, fun gameplay, WITHOUT all the bugs/problems. T2 base is slow, worthless, newbified, and had problems so bad, some people never actually got the game working.

I'm not talking about the in-game speed or bugs, I'm talking about the rate at which gameplay evolved. I realize they of course play a role but a game with few players can evolove quickly just like a game with many can evolve slowly.

Demos being released leads to a faster evolution of gameplay because people must constantly have new ideas to stay at the top. Sure, the current top players obviously want to stay there but at some point they have to think about the future of the game and weight the importance of GGs in comparison or they'll just be all alone.

Who cares how much a new player benefits? I care about my competition. I want my competition to stay on a level of skills AND smarts, not some fuckn newb watching some demo, and copying a route because he's too slow to come up with it on his own.

It's about foresight. There are going to be people comming from all different walks of gaming... newbs, fps vets, tribes vets, etc. It's about bringing people into the fold and helping them get up to speed. More people at a higher level of competition is only good for the game, that's the thing that brings out big tournaments, publicity, prizes, and the like. No one gives a shit about the 1000 or so real hard core t1 and t2 players that will be at the top at the start of vengeance, they care about the 100,000 hard-core CS players.

You keep ranting about newbified this, newbie that, etc, think about this...

Most every person that puts up a review of the game on a major site is going to be a newb (playing on a newb server for that matter), most every person that makes the business decision to host a big tournament is going to be a newb, most of the people playing the game (and thus most of sierra's income) is going to be from newbs, many of the people at the top of competition a year after release are going to be newbs.

Don't kid yourself, newbs make the game.

That's why games like starcraft and couterstrike are so successful, someone figures out they can win by doing something like building all zerglings, battlecruisers, or carriers. It's a newb tactic but often works, therefore that newb enjoys the game and will thus play again and suggest it to friends. On the other end of the spectrum you take something like homeworld where a newb could have 20 of one unit, go up against an enemy that has 15 of the same thing, get beat down, and his enemy still have 10 left... that pisses off a newbie... he does not suggest the game to his friends. Simmilarly in counterstrike someone can point whatever machine gun they're using at someone and kill them then get bigger and bigger guns and become effective because they've been in the server for a while. Thus that newbie gets some kills, enjoys his game, and tells friends as before. On the other end of the spectrum take tribes... some newbie can't get equip because his base is raped and then gets mortared w/o a chance while trying to repair it. Then when he goes to the other side of the map doesn't even know what hit him when he gets blown away by a full farm and repaired big turrets.

Think about it, it sounds silly from a veteran point of view in either situation but it's really that simple.

I don't think TWL would be up for hosting 5/10 30MB demos every night from several matches (that's an extreme understatement btw, there would be a lot more than that). I wouldn't trust any other "3rd party" to host the demo.

There wouldn't be a real need for twl to host personal demos though and they don't have to be kept for as long as they currently are (a year?).

It's true that I'm being idealistic, and it's probably not practical for every match to be held, there will of course also be exceptions where the demo cannot be had. Even if it was just the top 20 I would be happy though. Hell, if people were just open enough about their demos to share them freely I'd be happy... I just don't see that happening. Peeps seem to care too much about their rank on the ladder and too little about he game as a whole--just like they care too much about their personal score than their team's loss/win.
Post edited by GIMPbeowulf at 3/4/2004 10:49:32 AM

it'd be a great dissapointment if TWL didn't require server side demos

it's not like they have to host them.. but they should be available for cheat accusations

winning is not done by pure strategy.. very little in fact. winning is done by a team who has melded together and can feel eachother and adapt to the other team's strategy. and more than that you need very skilled individual players who can get their job done, and do various other jobs at the same time (basically just a skilled/smart player)

I don't think RT has had the same strategy for a single map ever, we have always changed our strats depending on what strengths our team currently has and what we know about the other team. and come match time, anything can happen... when we were getting our asses kicked on surreal, we changed to a 100% LO strat (just an adjustment made off the fly based on what we thought was going wrong) and we ended up winning.

if you're worried about someone seeing your route, or even knowing your general strategy, you have a long ways to go to be a top competitor
--
there -should- be a way to see if the server you are playing is recording a server demo, and if there isn't, the community will quickly correct this. that will solve your scrim dilemma (aside from personal demos)

As always we will use whatever tools we have at our disposal to handle cheat accusation. THANKFULLY, we have a lot of extra measures in place for the upcomming release. The DEV team has stated that they are spending more time on anti cheat methods, on top of that we already have seperate methods dealing with this engine. If server side demos are available, and prove to be invaluable in keeping a level playing field, we will try and use them in a private manner.

First off, I think SSD's should be required to be made, and should be made public in some fashion for TWL matches. I think this, as Gimp has aluded to, will speed the evolution of gameplay, and help to increase the speed at which a team can go from "noob" to "half-decent".

I think the privacy and secrecy issues aren't really issues at all, because if the demos are available to everyone equally, then EVERYONE should be able to go in with the same level of preparation if they are willing to take the time to prepare.

I want to respond to a few of Val's statements.

Originally posted by: Validuz
The only question that should be asked is, why in the flying fuck would we want to turn this into some crappyass fps like UT2k4? You totally remove the element of having SMART players, not in just real-time, but in the "ideas" of what to do.

Can you explain how exactly server side demos are going to remove the element of having smart players? I don't see it as doing that at all. The only thing i see it changing is that teams may have a better idea of what they are going to see going into a match before hand. That doesn't detract from the importance of smart playing. If anything, it emphasizes the importance of adaptation, because you won't necessarily be able to rely on you opposition having little to know idea about how you are going to play a map.

Originally posted by: Validuz

Who cares how much a new player benefits? I care about my competition. I want my competition to stay on a level of skills AND smarts, not some fuckn newb watching some demo, and copying a route because he's too slow to come up with it on his own. Tribes didn't have demos for "the gameplay". It's an extra feature, meaning that if a demo is released.. GREAT, but demos shouldn't be anywhere even CLOSE to competition (except client-side personal demos == required).

You should care about how new teams benefit from this, because it's new teams getting better that keep the top of the ladder alive. Learning a route from a demo, or from seeing someone run it in a pub is only part way to actually becoming a good player as you well know.

Letting people learn routes like that to start will hopefully help them learn how to find routes on their own. If they have no idea what a really good route looks and feels like, how are they ever going to learn to find them themselves?

OK, its my take.
I am undecided. Since I have been gone from the Tribes community I have been out and about the gaming community and have realized that Tribes is the only game where practice is equal to if not greater then scrims. Some FPS games require more extensive teamwork then tribes (cs, halo, cod)but at the same time don't come close to touching Tribes skill curve and Strategies.

because of this, it is very common to expect the other team to know what strat your using in other games besides tribes, simply do to the statement...

Team A scrims Team C, Team C tells Team B strategies, Team B knows Team A's strategies for match.

I would agree with the use of serverside demos if they could be activated and deactivated as well as displayed publicly when it is on or off. This would help catch hacks and cheats during matches, while scrims are exempt from being demoed by a third party. To stop cheating through scrims can still be done by first person demos if needed.

Sorry for long post.

Concerning Tribes 2 growth, Demos are 1 thing but not the biggest, Val has a good point here, Tribes 2 upon original release was a herendous spectacle of UE's. If you recall day 1, WOW, every 15 minutes I would UE and/or freeze. After the first patch it was better but not at all good still, after another minor patch was when UE's were mostly resolved and game play for hours on end was possible. It wasn't selling that was a problem, it was getting people to play the game. Try typing in any letter into the ingame browser for a user name, hundreds upon thousands of hits appear, the game certanly sold, but wasn't holding people well.

That and base tribes 2 was slow and floaty, for like shooting ducks with a sniper rifle.

{RiP} was an Unreal only clan until T2.

SSD's are a godsend.

As far as making match demos public - I would say "No". IF something is in question in a match, then the SSD gets sent to the TWL admin. If nothing is in question, the demo remains archived in personal HDD space as they are now in T2.

There were scripts that hid scripts while demo'ing in T2. The only reason I ever saw for such a function is that people had something to hide. More than once, in a questionable situation, I would see "their demo was corrupt" or "they didn;t have a acomplete demo".....

SSD's take care of this. As far as Punkbuster, it is only as good as the latest update. Being that T:V uses the Unreal engine, hacks will be made very shortly after release. Until those hacks are found or caught in a match, then they will go undetected by PB. When they stop paying or requesting PB updates (depends on profit from the game), then no updates are made and we will be left to something like the AA ladder uses (called CDC). Basically, another DT.

Anyone who doesn;t think players will cheat and try to compete to beat the system are naive. SSD's are the single solitary anti-cheat tool the ladder will have that cannot be modified via a client-side hack. It sees what the server sees and records it. Anyone who has looked at other games using this engine would be screaming for SSD's.....unless they had another agenda.

Don't think I'm not going to reply... I'm just busy with a scrim at the moment. I'LL BE BACK BITCHES!

the asshole of the tribes community

Originally posted by: Validuz
Don't think I'm not going to reply... I'm just busy with a scrim at the moment. I'LL BE BACK BITCHES!

Almost 12 hours have past since my last post. You're loosing it val, pretty soon there will be scores of forum whores beyond you.

Originally posted by: Cold Meat
Concerning Tribes 2 growth, Demos are 1 thing but not the biggest, Val has a good point here, Tribes 2 upon original release was a herendous spectacle of UE's. If you recall day 1, WOW, every 15 minutes I would UE and/or freeze. After the first patch it was better but not at all good still, after another minor patch was when UE's were mostly resolved and game play for hours on end was possible. It wasn't selling that was a problem, it was getting people to play the game. Try typing in any letter into the ingame browser for a user name, hundreds upon thousands of hits appear, the game certanly sold, but wasn't holding people well.

That and base tribes 2 was slow and floaty, for like shooting ducks with a sniper rifle.

^

the asshole of the tribes community

Originally posted by: GIMPbeowulf
I'm not talking about the in-game speed or bugs, I'm talking about the rate at which gameplay evolved. I realize they of course play a role but a game with few players can evolove quickly just like a game with many can evolve slowly.

The bugs and problems with T2, and it's generally SLOW gameplay (opposite of T1 Base). That's what caused the game to "slowly evolve". It had nothing to do with "demos being released". Hell, how many 5150 match demos do you see floating around?

Demos being released leads to a faster evolution of gameplay because people must constantly have new ideas to stay at the top. Sure, the current top players obviously want to stay there but at some point they have to think about the future of the game and weight the importance of GGs in comparison or they'll just be all alone.

Just as people keep stating the obvious about "it's executing the strat, not just knowing it", I'll say that there aren't "unlimited" (efficient)strats.

Who cares how much a new player benefits? I care about my competition. I want my competition to stay on a level of skills AND smarts, not some fuckn newb watching some demo, and copying a route because he's too slow to come up with it on his own.

It's about foresight. There are going to be people comming from all different walks of gaming... newbs, fps vets, tribes vets, etc. It's about bringing people into the fold and helping them get up to speed. More people at a higher level of competition is only good for the game, that's the thing that brings out big tournaments, publicity, prizes, and the like. No one gives a shit about the 1000 or so real hard core t1 and t2 players that will be at the top at the start of vengeance, they care about the 100,000 hard-core CS players.

The thing is, you aren't making competition "higher skilled", you're lowering the general zenith of competition down.

You keep ranting about newbified this, newbie that, etc, think about this...

Most every person that puts up a review of the game on a major site is going to be a newb (playing on a newb server for that matter), most every person that makes the business decision to host a big tournament is going to be a newb, most of the people playing the game (and thus most of sierra's income) is going to be from newbs, many of the people at the top of competition a year after release are going to be newbs.

Don't kid yourself, newbs make the game.

They sure do.. but then again, so do the 'vets'. 'Newbies' that do the game reviews aren't in top competition. SSDs are great for the game, but not for competition. Your argument here it trying to defend the OPTION of SSDs, and that's not what we're discussing. We already know itll "help" the game, (just like HLTV, etc) but it won't help competition (and that's what we're talking about; its implementation in comp).

That's why games like starcraft and couterstrike are so successful, someone figures out they can win by doing something like building all zerglings, battlecruisers, or carriers. It's a newb tactic but often works, therefore that newb enjoys the game and will thus play again and suggest it to friends. On the other end of the spectrum you take something like homeworld where a newb could have 20 of one unit, go up against an enemy that has 15 of the same thing, get beat down, and his enemy still have 10 left... that pisses off a newbie... he does not suggest the game to his friends.

Simmilarly in counterstrike someone can point whatever machine gun they're using at someone and kill them then get bigger and bigger guns and become effective because they've been in the server for a while. Thus that newbie gets some kills, enjoys his game, and tells friends as before. On the other end of the spectrum take tribes... some newbie can't get equip because his base is raped and then gets mortared w/o a chance while trying to repair it. Then when he goes to the other side of the map doesn't even know what hit him when he gets blown away by a full farm and repaired big turrets.

CounterStrike and StarCraft... two real good comparisons to tribes.

Anyways, everything you just said... translates into this:
"Dumb the game down, so the newbies are efficient, even if they suck."

Yea, no thanks. I'd rather have Tribes as it's always been, steep learning curve.. and not just some stupid, newbie-ass UT2k4 fps.

I don't think TWL would be up for hosting 5/10 30MB demos every night from several matches (that's an extreme understatement btw, there would be a lot more than that). I wouldn't trust any other "3rd party" to host the demo.

There wouldn't be a real need for twl to host personal demos though and they don't have to be kept for as long as they currently are (a year?).

Here's a very important detail to my argument:
TWL would have to basically REQUIRE (and this is only if the newbies are given their lolipop and SSDs are required), that every match SSD be uploaded (so it's public - NOT just "buddybuddy" only). TWL would have to STRICTLY regulate and require mandatory uploads of every SSD, and have harsh punishments for non-complying teams. Anything else (SSDs being in the hands of server-admins, and not TWL), would be TOTALLY inacceptable.

It's true that I'm being idealistic, and it's probably not practical for every match to be held, there will of course also be exceptions where the demo cannot be had. Even if it was just the top 20 I would be happy though. Hell, if people were just open enough about their demos to share them freely I'd be happy... I just don't see that happening. Peeps seem to care too much about their rank on the ladder and too little about he game as a whole--just like they care too much about their personal score than their team's loss/win.

No, the thing is... I care more about my competition, rather than dumbing the game's competition out for some stupid newbie. It's not the rank, it's the unqiue style of competition.

the asshole of the tribes community

Originally posted by: biscuit
As always we will use whatever tools we have at our disposal to handle cheat accusation. THANKFULLY, we have a lot of extra measures in place for the upcomming release. The DEV team has stated that they are spending more time on anti cheat methods, on top of that we already have seperate methods dealing with this engine. If server side demos are available, and prove to be invaluable in keeping a level playing field, we will try and use them in a private manner.

It's totally impossible to use them in a "private manner". They either have to be 100% public, in which any TWL registered person can download them, or they will be abused (released to buddies teams, etc) and competition will hurt.

the asshole of the tribes community

I don't know alot about competition in tribes(or any game for that matter), I'm new here but I do know that a team is obviously not very good if they only have 1 or 2 strats and can't adapt to new challenges. I think this will be a good feature and look forward to playing tribes competetivly some day. The input from a TWL Newb...

"Bew bew!"
,XeroShift

Originally posted by: jsut
First off, I think SSD's should be required to be made, and should be made public in some fashion for TWL matches. I think this, as Gimp has aluded to, will speed the evolution of gameplay, and help to increase the speed at which a team can go from "noob" to "half-decent".

I think the privacy and secrecy issues aren't really issues at all, because if the demos are available to everyone equally, then EVERYONE should be able to go in with the same level of preparation if they are willing to take the time to prepare.

They "aren't an issue" to you, because you've never been in top competition. Knowing what the other team is going to do, even in the start... totally changes the match. That includes general strats and timing specific player/group actions, to individual's routes.

Originally posted by: Validuz
The only question that should be asked is, why in the flying fuck would we want to turn this into some crappyass fps like UT2k4? You totally remove the element of having SMART players, not in just real-time, but in the "ideas" of what to do.

Can you explain how exactly server side demos are going to remove the element of having smart players? I don't see it as doing that at all. The only thing i see it changing is that teams may have a better idea of what they are going to see going into a match before hand. That doesn't detract from the importance of smart playing. If anything, it emphasizes the importance of adaptation, because you won't necessarily be able to rely on you opposition having little to know idea about how you are going to play a map.

No, I never said having SSDs for matches required, makes your smart players dumb. It just removes the element of having unknown routes, and just general strats/positions people haven't seen/used. Of course smart players will always adjust to things happening in a match, but that's not the point. They shouldn't have to adjust for things the other team wasn't smart enough to pick up, without help from a SSD.

Originally posted by: Validuz
Who cares how much a new player benefits? I care about my competition. I want my competition to stay on a level of skills AND smarts, not some fuckn newb watching some demo, and copying a route because he's too slow to come up with it on his own. Tribes didn't have demos for "the gameplay". It's an extra feature, meaning that if a demo is released.. GREAT, but demos shouldn't be anywhere even CLOSE to competition (except client-side personal demos == required).

You should care about how new teams benefit from this, because it's new teams getting better that keep the top of the ladder alive. Learning a route from a demo, or from seeing someone run it in a pub is only part way to actually becoming a good player as you well know.

The only thing I've leared from watching demos (two things)... is that you're either a smart player, or your not (skilled or not; either way). The other thing, is just the general strat of the other team.

And no, I don't care "how fast" the newer/newbie teams excel in T:V. That's the beauty of this game. It actually SEPARATES the newbies, from the average, from the good, from the great, from the the pros. This game SHOULDN'T be "picked up fast". We don't want to make the game another BORING fps that dies down after a couple months. You have to keep people HOOKED on the game, for it's indepth gameplay, and very long/steep learing curve.

Do you honestly think Tribes fan-base is dead? This game (the whole series) picks up/has DEDICATED fans, and basically with the release of T:V (on a great engine, etc), it will pick up even more. Tribes may not have the sudden "MASS" of gamers playing it (that get bored of other games fast), but the people it does pick up, stay.

Letting people learn routes like that to start will hopefully help them learn how to find routes on their own. If they have no idea what a really good route looks and feels like, how are they ever going to learn to find them themselves?

People still release demos.. and people still play in pubs. That's the whole point of having a steep learning curve game. Why remove that?

the asshole of the tribes community

Originally posted by: XeroShift
I don't know alot about competition in tribes(or any game for that matter), I'm new here but I do know that a team is obviously not very good if they only have 1 or 2 strats and can't adapt to new challenges. I think this will be a good feature and look forward to playing tribes competetivly some day. The input from a TWL Newb...

There's no such thing as "one or two" strats, it's the idea that there are limited "new" things you can do in the game, and you don't want your opponent having an advantage, because he knows what you guys commonly do. On top of that, the game and its players shoul evolve on their own pace, and not be "pushed" (or hurt) by requiring SSDs in comeptition.

the asshole of the tribes community

Val. You are very close to taking another vacation.

If you need an explanation as to why you are welcome to find me in IRC.


-->Simply put: If server side demos are available and they prove invaluable in keeping the competition level, then the use of them will be explored, it's that simple. If server side demos were available in T2 at this point you can bet they would be being used right now.

Originally posted by: Validuz
They "aren't an issue" to you, because you've never been in top competition. Knowing what the other team is going to do, even in the start... totally changes the match. That includes general strats and timing specific player/group actions, to individual's routes.

It's nice of you to condescend, but I know how much of a difference it can make. Also, as you've said, if they aren't public they will be abused, why not just mandate them, and make the public so EVERYONE can abuse them? Isn't that option better than stressing out about whether or not team X that you scimmed is releasing demos (either server side or client side)

Originally posted by: Validuz

No, I never said having SSDs for matches required, makes your smart players dumb. It just removes the element of having unknown routes, and just general strats/positions people haven't seen/used. Of course smart players will always adjust to things happening in a match, but that's not the point. They shouldn't have to adjust for things the other team wasn't smart enough to pick up, without help from a SSD.

no, you said it would turn the game into "a crappyass fps like UT2k4". I disagree. No level of knowledge about routes and the like can every turn a tribes game into a ground pounder like UT.

What is so bad about giving a weaker team a bit of a leg up? It's not like your team wouldn't benefit from it too?

Originally posted by: Validuz

People still release demos.. and people still play in pubs. That's the whole point of having a steep learning curve game. Why remove that?

I don't think it removes it. I think it changes the curve so that less people will play one or two matches on the ladder, get slaughtered cause they don't have any idea about comp, and quit. That's what i think having SSD's public will help to avoid, and i honestly think that by avoiding that, the ladder will be larger, and have more skilled teams on it (eventually). I don't see that as a bad thing, and since part of what Irrational is trying to do with T:V is draw a massive audience, wouldn't it serve TWL well to try to draw them into competion and keep them around?

anyway, by the sounds of things they are going to be required for match play one way or the other. And if they are, wouldn't you rather have them be available to everyone instead of just to teams that are friendly with other teams?

Jsut has just at least as much experience with running a team as any of us. Less hardcore, pen may be, but that doesn't make his statements unqualified.

The example about starcraft does indeed apply, tribes has neither the low-end or high-end appeal. It goes from people that don't do anything besides defend to people that actively measure their actions per miniute and make a living off playing the game. The game has been around since 96 or 97 and still has far more players than tribes. It has both high-end and lasting appeal while offering newbies some measure of success thus making it a game development success story.

Counterstrike on the other hand, does not have high level play aside from just better aim, this is true, but isn't known for a short history either.

The point is, it's important for new players to have some measure of success early and to see themselves improve. That constant improvement and success along the way is what keeps people with the game. One big way to assist with that is to show them what the "next level" looks like.

When an experienced player watches a demo he'll see stuff about strategy and learn about that particular player's style but when a new player watches they learn new tricks, tactics, and the mentality.

Therefore, it will make competition at the top more close and compedative while helping newer players improve at a quicker rate. Personally I don't see either one of those things as bad. It almost sounds, val, like you're suggesting you don't want a more skilled player population; I'd much rather be able to go into a pub and have 3/4 of them playing smart for a GG than having 1/3 playing smart and it sucking.

Even if such improvement for the overall player population comes at some cost to the top competition, that's still worth it and in the end will only increase the high level competition--not because the game is dumbed down but because the players are actually that good.
Post edited by GIMPbeowulf at 3/5/2004 9:12:04 AM

Frankly I don't mind seeing a high rate of improvement in skill, as well as close competition,so long as the skill curve keeps going, which is tricky for designers. Its always nice to look back and see your team is more advance then others, but if everyone is watching your steps, you can't break away that easily unless a game allows a team to keep getting better (tribes has done this in the past).

Originally posted by: Cold Meat
OK, its my take.
I am undecided. Since I have been gone from the Tribes community I have been out and about the gaming community and have realized that Tribes is the only game where practice is equal to if not greater then scrims. Some FPS games require more extensive teamwork then tribes (cs, halo, cod)

I played in top tribes matches and used to watch my brother play cal I cs you have no idea what you are talking about.

Originally posted by: Spiderman

Originally posted by: Cold Meat
OK, its my take.
I am undecided. Since I have been gone from the Tribes community I have been out and about the gaming community and have realized that Tribes is the only game where practice is equal to if not greater then scrims. Some FPS games require more extensive teamwork then tribes (cs, halo, cod)

I played in top tribes matches and used to watch my brother play cal I cs you have no idea what you are talking about.

^

the asshole of the tribes community

I'm interested to know what Cold Meat means. If you're playing on a team at top levels of competition, Teamwork is essential no matter what the title of the game.

Tribes encourages players to specialize and plans often include seperation of teammates on maps to do distict jobs in order to achieve a common goal. Then there are the cowboys, who were much more common in Tribes and still exist in Tribes2 on smaller scale.

Dont h8 on our new forum! Let the man speak his mind.

One of the original benefits of server sided demo's was for Tribes TV. It allows more freedom and better shoutcasting/video casting of T:V matches.

Back in the early days of T2 5150 vs Vanguard etc.. T2 TV wasn't around, so many secrets were protected. With T:V, I imagine T:V TV will be out either soon after or right out of the box. Many tactics will be exposed early on in T:V TV, so I don't think the level of strat secrecy will be around as much as it was in T2.

How about no one makes cheats.







hahahahahahahaha.. right

Originally posted by: A z r a e l
One of the original benefits of server sided demo's was for Tribes TV. It allows more freedom and better shoutcasting/video casting of T:V matches.

Back in the early days of T2 5150 vs Vanguard etc.. T2 TV wasn't around, so many secrets were protected. With T:V, I imagine T:V TV will be out either soon after or right out of the box. Many tactics will be exposed early on in T:V TV, so I don't think the level of strat secrecy will be around as much as it was in T2.

Read the background information in my original post, we're talking about something different than observer demos.

the reason there aren't many 5150, +GoD+, =V=, TF, SES, etc. demos floating around is because you have to be running a different version of T2 to view them.

I know my 5150 vs +GoD+ demo (which is mostly sLaM shocklancing me) won't play on current versions of T2. You have to go back before classic was released, to the version of T2 that was out around the time B++ was in full swing.

Server Side Demos are a mixed blessing. I don't want other teams to know my routes, spam points (especially this one), or strategies. Of course, I wouldn't mind knowing the other team's routes, strats, and spam points

Then again, I almost never watch demos. I'm probably the laziest team captain of all time. Even if someone sends me a demo, tells me it has a great route for the map we're playing, I probably won't watch it. So I can't imagine taking the time to watch an SSD.

So SSDs only hurt me. Oh well. If it catches a few LittleWings here and there I guess it's a good thing.