Dear Alfred and Valve, First of all, let me say that I have had a lot of enjoyment from Counter Strike Source, so much so that I created GotGames.com.au in Australia to specifically address the lack of a serious CSS competitive community in Australia and New Zealand. In a little over 6 months, we have created the biggest source community in Australia and New Zealand. The updates and changes that you have made to the game have been very positive on the whole. Fixing the crouch POV and the SourceTV was a huge boost for the competitive scene and much appreciated.
I am writing to you in the hope that you will address 4 issues that several programmers believe would take one competent programmer less than 1 day resolve. If these 4 simple changes were made, it would really help the competitive community and help organisations such as WCG, CPL and CEVO make the change to source. These issues involve no changes to the engine itself but merely the addition of some simple cvars. 1. Dead body Cam, when you die you have approximately 3-5 seconds to tell your teammates through Ventrilo and Teamspeak which way the opposition went before the camera view changes to one of your teammates. A cvar that turns off the dead body cam so that when you die, the camera view instantly changes to your teammates POV removing the ability for you to be able to spectate the enemy illegally while you are dead. This simple cvar would make the world of difference to the online competitive community. 2. Dead players being able to tell their live teammates through Ventrilo or Teamspeak that the opposition has just picked up the bomb because the scoreboard tells players when a bomb has been picked up the opposition. A simple cvar would resolve this and could be implemented very easily. 3. The creation of a cvar that turns the need to purchase ammo on, obviously this would be more involved than the first 2 but couldn't be to hard assuming that you still have the ammo code somewhere. By removing the need to purchase ammo you removed a substantial amount of tactics from the game, I also agree though removing ammo for the average player is a good idea, hence the best option is a cvar. 4. A cvar that increases the walking speed for competitive purposes, again a very simple change that would be welcomed by the competitive community without affecting the public community. So as you can see, these are very simple and easy changes that Valve could make that would significantly improve the competitive community and I'm certain that 95% of the competitive community would agree with me. Alex "Hybrid" Mottshaw This message is intended solely for the individual (s) and entity(s) addressed. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged information. The use, copying or distribution of this message or any information it contains, by anyone other than the addressee, is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] ************************* -----Original Message----- From: Whisper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 20 December 2006 3:45 AM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlds] Post-outage thoughts -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Considering that STEAM is now a revenue generating service, my bet is Valve will sort this out sooner rather than later, especially since they are now responsible to not only their own games anymore but to a lot of other Game Developers as well. On 12/20/06, Newbie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -- > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > One thing constantly being missed is that section C of paragraph 9 of > Steam > Subscriber agreement which every one of us agreed to states that: > > VALVE DOES NOT GUARANTEE CONTINUOUS, ERROR-FREE, VIRUS-FREE OR SECURE > OPERATION AND ACCESS TO STEAM, THE STEAM SOFTWARE, YOUR ACCOUNT AND/OR > YOUR SUBSCRIPTIONS(S). > > It means we all agreed with the fact that we can not demand Valve to > support > Steam at all. The fact that Valve restored the service reasonably quick > means they don't want to loose customers and profit but does not mean they > had obligations towards us to do so. > > Another thing that should be considered is overall network downtime > throughout the year. What was that? less than 12 hours overall? Meaning > availability is about 99.8%... Not the best figure for mission critical > application but pretty much reasonable for gaming services. > > Regards, > Newbie > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <hlds@list.valvesoftware.com> > > Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 7:36:13 -0600 > > Subject: Re: [hlds] Post-outage thoughts > > > > > All of these post on this subject and still NOTHING FROM VALVE!! Any bets > on > what their gonna do? My moneys on nothing.... > > > > > > From: "Edward Luna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Date: 2006/12/19 Tue AM 07:18:14 CST > > > To: <hlds@list.valvesoftware.com> > > > Subject: RE: RE: RE: Re: [hlds] Post-outage thoughts > > > > > > Very well said Frazer, as always. However, I'm obligated to point out, > whatever fault tolerance Valve may or may not have built in... it was > insufficient for this event. Until we are informed to the contrary by > Valve, we must conclude that they were not geographically redundant... > furthermore, to assume they considered a wide-spread power outage in the > Northwest "not very probable" does not bode well for their level of fault > tolerance analysis. We needn't wonder if their plan would work, we know > it > failed. The salient question to be answered now is "do they intend to > bring > their redundancy inline with the need" and if not... will their customers > accept that position? > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Frazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 7:43 AM > > > To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com > > > Subject: RE: RE: RE: Re: [hlds] Post-outage thoughts > > > > > > > > > Whether or not a service provider chooses to deploy redundant services > is > a > > > decision that is generally made as part of an overall risk-management > > > analysis. Factors such as probability of component failure, business > impact > > > and cost are weighed in reaching a decision as to how much money a > provider > > > should (and can afford) to invest in redundant service elements. While > a > > > systemic power outage is a possibility, it may not be very probable. In > > > fact, there is every likelihood that service elements which would be > > > affected by such a wide outage are not all within Valve's control. We > have > > > no information regarding Valve's service infrastructure, but we might > assume > > > that it includes fault-tolerant elements (e.g. clustered servers, > redundant > > > network paths, etc.) which have been chosen to provide protection from > more > > > probable outages (for example, individual hardware failures, network > outage > > > of a given carrier). > > > > > > Given the funding resources to do so, most service providers would > eagerly > > > embrace "geographic redundancy". However, no business has unlimited > > > financial resources and in the end, Valve has to strike a balance > between > > > cost and risk, in delivering its services. Valve has an obligation to > its > > > investors to make balanced spending decisions and deliver sustainable > > > profitability as much as it needs to deliver reasonable service levels > to > > > its customers. As well, the cost of complete redundancy would almost > > > certainly have to be borne in the price of the product. While the > end-user > > > impact was certainly real, it is not, after all, an air traffic control > > > system. last night, our servers were full again. > > > > > > I think Valve did a respectable job in restoring services in a timely > > > fashion. No doubt they were extremely motivated to do so. It appeared > to > > > me that they followed a prioritized approach, first restoring services > > > critical to supporting game-play. While this simply may have been a > sequence > > > imposed by the situation, versus any kind of altruistic service policy, > the > > > net effect was the same. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Tuttle > > > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 4:23 PM > > > To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com > > > Subject: RE: RE: RE: Re: [hlds] Post-outage thoughts > > > > > > Such redundancy is Networking 101 and Programming 101... You can choose > to > > > ignore it if you like... But in the real word it is fact . > > > > > > Valve is probably making enough money to make it reasonable for them to > > > invest in a redundant system for that "money making" aparatus. That is > > > Economics 101. You think it looks good to investors that the "backbone" > of > > > the system went down for the entire world because of one geological > > > disaster? You think that's a good selling point for software developers > > > that want to bring their product to market? 273,468 game players > couldn't > > > play because Valve had all their eggs in that one "geographical" basket. > > > Wise business decision? You decide... > > > > > > Ok maybe they are 500 level courses but you still get the point :D > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 2:57 PM > > > > To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com > > > > Subject: RE: RE: RE: Re: [hlds] Post-outage thoughts > > > > > > > > All I'm seeing is whining, pettiness, and monday morning > > > > quarterbacking. > > > > > > > > Lets try this. If anyone out there has a diagram of the > > > > Valve infrastructure, and a complete understanding of who > > > > they contract with for what services and facilities, then lets see it. > > > > > > > > I only am reading people bitching about what Valve should > > > > have done over the last 10 years, and "I could do it better", > > > > without any reguard or perspective on what the real world > > > > impact things may be having in the Seattle area. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > [http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds] > -- > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > -- _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
