Would you use torrent protocol for downloading TW3 updates?

[Thendarion]

Would you use torrent protocol for downloading TW3 updates?

I believe that it would be awesome if TW3 used the torrent protocol to download content and updates. Torrent is robust, reduces server load and it doesn't cost a złoty.

What do you think?

EDIT: poll added

 

[TemerianGirl]

GOG.com uses something like that, is it not? And W2 updates were downloaded through launcher. I hope it will stays that way.
I will also buy Witcher 3 there then it comes out, as two previous games before.

 

[gregski]

Thread title edited as the previous one was rather misleading.

 

[Aaden]

I'm absolutely in favor of a peer-to-peer protocol for update downloads to increase download speeds and reduce server load. But it should be part of the launcher/game updater, like Blizzard does it. If they only offer the option to download it via a third-party torrent app I'm sure I won't do that but download it directly with a single click, even if that turns out to be a bit slower.

But I think the whole issue only really arises if they plan to release big updates for a long time after release, regularly. Slow download speeds are a non-issue for me if it's for occassional small updates.

 

[dragonbird]

GOG.com uses something like that, is it not? And W2 updates were downloaded through launcher. I hope it will stays that way.
I will also buy Witcher 3 there then it comes out, as two previous games before.

No, they just use a download manager.

The important thing is that they have adequate capacity to handle the load. Whether they use torrent, edgecast, whatever is really their business decision.

I'm not really aware of them having problems in the past, but then I wasn't around when TW2 came out.

 

[sidspyker]

 

[AserPik]

But to an uneducated crowd, Torrent has gained a bad name as it has become associated with piracy, thus could be an issue for publicity. Small but it is true.

 

[Aaden]

But to an uneducated crowd, Torrent has gained a bad name as it has become associated with piracy, thus could be an issue for publicity. Small but it is true.

I doubt that. I never heard of an instance of a software or what-not having a bad reputation because of it being offered via torrent or using some kind of peer-to-peer system for updating.

 

[Zanderat]

But to an uneducated crowd, Torrent has gained a bad name as it has become associated with piracy, thus could be an issue for publicity. Small but it is true.

I have an issue with seeding anything on my pc. Too risky.

 

[CostinRaz]

Blizzard has been doing this for years and with no publicity issues.

Seriously people don't give a fuck. Of course allmighty Blizzard has some of the best video game servers out there ( and before anyone mentions it, yes there can be issues even so ).

 

[robert1a]

Hello All,

All I can say to this, if people feel the need to get updates from seeders then you'll have to except what little extras you may get in the process. My updates will be done the old fashion way I hope...... if it takes an hour to get them from " Official " sources then so be it. There is no way I opening up my system for updates to anyone other then " The Official Game Updater " or getting them from the official site to download manually.


P.C. security starts with the owner first, if you are going to open your system up to anyone and everyone for torrents of anything, you deserve what you may get.


That is just in my honest opinion, everyone else may have or had different experiences.


Cheers!

 

[GuyNwah]

No torrents. Just no.

CDPR has adequate resources to pay for the best forward hosting available. They have done so in the past, and they get better download distribution than you ever could with torrent.

Whatever Blizzard was thinking, torrent is a lousy protocol for distributing commercial pay-for software. You want full control over where it is distributed from, you want to be able to keep current versions on every site that hosts it, and you should have the resources to pay for forward hosting if you are selling something good enough to make a profit on.

And you should not expose your customers to malicious peers or overzealous terms-of-service enforcers, or exploit their upload bandwidth. Those are all contrary to being a responsible seller of digital goods.

 

[sidspyker]

No. Just no.

CDPR has adequate resources to pay for the best forward hosting available. They have done so in the past, and they get better download distribution than you ever could with torrent.

Whatever Blizzard was thinking, torrent is a lousy protocol for distributing commercial pay-for software. You want full control over where it is distributed from, you want to be able to keep current versions on every site that hosts it, and you should have the resources to pay for forward hosting if you are selling something good enough to make a profit on.

While it probably isn't on a comparable scale. Edgecast handled FCR2's initial downloads queue pretty good.

 

[GuyNwah]

While it probably isn't on a comparable scale. Edgecast handled FCR2's initial downloads queue pretty good.

They've used Edgecast for all their updates. It had enough capacity to handle the shipload of 10GB downloads on the release of EE. The problems that occurred then weren't due to the use of Edgecast for hosting.

 

[sidspyker]

They've used Edgecast for all their updates. It had enough capacity to handle the shipload of 10GB downloads on the release of EE. The problems that occurred then weren't due to the use of Edgecast for hosting.

Yeah, I was just using FCR2 as an example because I know for certain it had a huge demand instantly can't say about patches.

 

[CostinRaz]

Guy: Well Blizzard has 2 options for downloads, peer 2 peer via a client in the game or setup, or direct download.

The peer 2 peer option is generally faster. It's worked pretty well for World of Warcraft updates and setups.

 

[sfinx]

There should be a poll in this topic. And I have no problem with that.

 

[dragonbird]

Guy: Well Blizzard has 2 options for downloads, peer 2 peer via a client in the game or setup, or direct download.

The peer 2 peer option is generally faster. It's worked pretty well for World of Warcraft updates and setups.

It probably becomes a lot simpler to manage for a game that requires online access.

Anyway, as Guy said, CDPR already have a solution with Edgecast, and it's worked fine for them in the past, so why add unnecessary complications? If the limit is user bandwidth, torrents don't make it go any faster. If the problem is vendor bandwidth, then they need to address it in the way they see as most appropriate.

And while there's no harm in making suggestions, it's still CDPR's responsibility to make sure they have adequate resources. I'm not sure that I'd like to see them walk away from that responsibility by using torrents.

There should be a poll in this topic. And I have no problem with that.

I'm not sure why - it isn't our decision.

 

[GuyNwah]

Guy: Well Blizzard has 2 options for downloads, peer 2 peer via a client in the game or setup, or direct download.

The peer 2 peer option is generally faster. It's worked pretty well for World of Warcraft updates and setups.

If peer to peer is faster, it's because Blizzard is being cheap bastards and not providing enough bandwidth or forward positioning on the provider side.

CDPR's capacity for supporting downloads is limited not by their provisioning, not by their choice of technology, but by customer-side networks.

Further burdening those customer-side networks by causing them to run peer to peer will only make things much worse.

 

[CostinRaz]

If peer to peer is faster, it's because Blizzard is being cheap bastards and not providing enough bandwidth or forward positioning on the provider side.

Maybe it would have something to do with the millions of people that stress their connections when patches and expansions come out.

We've seen how in the past CDPR servers have failed to cope with the large traffic with updates.