5 ms·

As a small indie developer I don't understand your argument. Building a network like Riot can only be done by billion dollar publishers, but I could conceivably

As a small indie developer I don't understand your argument. Building a network like Riot can only be done by billion dollar publishers, but I could conceivably use this network. If you don't want solutions like this, are you also against private networks? In addition to Riot, Google famously cuts the gordian knot of CAP in Spanner by declaring their network won't go down. If it's ok to do it yourself but not outsource it, "think of the little guy" holds no water.

ArtWomb 7y ago
Riot's investment in private cloud is in turn informing game design for an upcoming FPS codename: Project A ;) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iGU6PctOBg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iGU6PctOBg
pingyong 7y ago
Steam might be a better example here, as Valve already allows devs to use their private network for game servers. Although it should be noted that all of this effort is only worth it because greedy ISPs are unwilling to peer to certain other networks in most (all?) cases, as the private network is still running through the same cables for most of the way.
ergothus 7y ago
Why would Riot give this network to competitors? Only to make money. If that price gets too high. You, as s small indie developer, have just been driven out of the market. That's the logic of the above post. The answer is NEITHER "outsource it" NOR "do it yourself". Instead, if the public offering is good enough, you dont need either option. That's how the internet has worked and grown so far.
- reitzensteinm 7y ago
  Right, so you want to outlaw networks like those of Google and Riot? Not sure I can get on board with that, but it would level the playing field.
  - ergothus 7y ago
    This isn't me, this is the whole concept of net neutrality - the internet is a utility where all access is equal access, at least in terms of priority. (obviously we have rate limiting and people generally don't have protests about that - it's priority that is a problem) Many of the complaints in the reaction to the article is that the article is using the language of net neutrality to argue for the opposite (pay for access, which includes the ability to pay more for privileged access).

ArtWomb 7y ago

Riot's investment in private cloud is in turn informing game design for an upcoming FPS codename: Project A ;) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iGU6PctOBg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iGU6PctOBg

pingyong 7y ago

Steam might be a better example here, as Valve already allows devs to use their private network for game servers. Although it should be noted that all of this effort is only worth it because greedy ISPs are unwilling to peer to certain other networks in most (all?) cases, as the private network is still running through the same cables for most of the way.

ergothus 7y ago

Why would Riot give this network to competitors? Only to make money. If that price gets too high. You, as s small indie developer, have just been driven out of the market. That's the logic of the above post. The answer is NEITHER "outsource it" NOR "do it yourself". Instead, if the public offering is good enough, you dont need either option. That's how the internet has worked and grown so far.

reitzensteinm 7y ago
Right, so you want to outlaw networks like those of Google and Riot? Not sure I can get on board with that, but it would level the playing field.
- ergothus 7y ago
  This isn't me, this is the whole concept of net neutrality - the internet is a utility where all access is equal access, at least in terms of priority. (obviously we have rate limiting and people generally don't have protests about that - it's priority that is a problem) Many of the complaints in the reaction to the article is that the article is using the language of net neutrality to argue for the opposite (pay for access, which includes the ability to pay more for privileged access).