PDA

View Full Version : Steam as BitTorrent?


saturnotaku
11-22-04, 01:46 PM
I was musing to myself today, would Steam maybe have worked a little better if it was set up like BitTorrent? Valve and all the major hardware/software sites could be seeds, people who have dedicated game/file servers could host as well. Perhaps this might have alleviated some of the bandwidth/connection issues people have had.

Please feel free to correct me if my musing is misguided, but I figured I'd throw it out there.

Edge
11-22-04, 02:02 PM
Maybe as an option, as long as it doesn't automatically make clients serve files. That's one of the reasons I can't use bittorents: my ISP gets suspicious if you use too much upload speed. But, maybe for mods and such it would be cool: allow people to server mods over a "bittorent-like" Steam network...it could work out...

Ninjaman09
11-22-04, 02:12 PM
I think in the future everything should work like Bittorrent, but for now the network infrastructure is not in place to keep things running efficiently. Take the WoW beta patch, for example. Blizzard uses Bittorrent to distribute WoW patches. It took over 45 minutes for me to download a 16 megabyte file on my 1.5mb DSL connection. There just weren't enough users with fast enough uploads to send it to me at a decent speed. Another problem is the tremendous amount of users that do not know how to configure port forwarding on their firewalls, thus rendering Bittorrent ineffective. I still think it's the best idea for data distribution ever, but it's gonna take a while before it works like it should.

Pimp!
11-22-04, 02:37 PM
well Valve did get help from bit torrent creator

Fatman
11-22-04, 02:54 PM
IIRC Valve hired the creator of BitTorrent.

oldsk00l
11-22-04, 03:06 PM
I think in the future everything should work like Bittorrent, but for now the network infrastructure is not in place to keep things running efficiently. Take the WoW beta patch, for example. Blizzard uses Bittorrent to distribute WoW patches. It took over 45 minutes for me to download a 16 megabyte file on my 1.5mb DSL connection. There just weren't enough users with fast enough uploads to send it to me at a decent speed. Another problem is the tremendous amount of users that do not know how to configure port forwarding on their firewalls, thus rendering Bittorrent ineffective. I still think it's the best idea for data distribution ever, but it's gonna take a while before it works like it should.

I agree that it's partially infrastructure.

However, it's alot to do with the bandwidth most users have. Not only do most ISP's get suspicious of high upload rates, but most upload rates suck ass in general.

Take Comcast services, a friend of mine has the 3.3meg package, but his upload rate is only 256k. So even if his upload rate was constantly saturated throughout the entire torrent download, by his setup he's a total leecher.

His ratio can never be better than 12:1. On my DSL setup it's a symmetric package, not adsl, and it's 1.5 meg. We need more connections like that out in homes in order for a self-sustaining download network. 12 users to saturate one user doesn't make sense to me.

netviper13
11-22-04, 03:13 PM
I agree that it's partially infrastructure.

However, it's alot to do with the bandwidth most users have. Not only do most ISP's get suspicious of high upload rates, but most upload rates suck ass in general.

Take Comcast services, a friend of mine has the 3.3meg package, but his upload rate is only 256k. So even if his upload rate was constantly saturated throughout the entire torrent download, by his setup he's a total leecher.

His ratio can never be better than 12:1. On my DSL setup it's a symmetric package, not adsl, and it's 1.5 meg. We need more connections like that out in homes in order for a self-sustaining download network. 12 users to saturate one user doesn't make sense to me.

I agree. While I don't have that problem here on campus, at home our connection is a 3mb/512k, which is rediculously unbalanced. Home connections are designed to work within a client/server world, but as things become more P2P-based, I think ISPs will have to adapt.

saturnotaku
11-22-04, 03:18 PM
Very interesting responses. I appreciate the insight.

I think end users should have the option to become a host. Those who have the bandwidth to spare can have it, those who don't can just leech. That's why I proposed trying to get the major sites on-board (nV News, Rage3D, [H], Anand, et al) because they have the bandwidth available, at least for when major files are first released and users are trying to get them. Then once enough other people sign up to be a server, the news sites can take the Torrents down.

GlowStick
11-22-04, 03:42 PM
Well most home ISP's have it setup like this.

The more you upload, it chokes your latency.

For example, my max upload is about 30KB, my max download is about 500KB, if i am uploading at 30KB i cannot browse the web the latency is so high, eg i get timeouts for everything.

If i upload at 25k web browsing is OK acceptable, but the average latency is 400-600 with spikes to the 1000's

If i am uploading at 20 or below, i can web browse seemlessly, however uploading at 10K or more means i cannot play ANY online game. whatso ever my latnecy will be in the 300's and interput all the time.

So paying for valve to use my bandwith i dont think so.

oldsk00l
11-22-04, 03:59 PM
With my DSL package though, nothing is choked. I am fully able to saturate my upload and still achieve the intended download (with the connection overhead of course)

I really wish telecoms would sign more folks up like this, or give consumers more self-directed packages.

ie HERE is your bandwidth, how do you want it spread out?

Lfctony
11-23-04, 03:19 AM
Take my connection. 1Mbit DL, 256K UL. I actually limit my UL to 9kb/s so that my connection isn't choked. During nights I leave it upload at max to give back. I believe it would allow users to get files much faster. And they should definitely put advanced options like a normal client, limit upload rate, for how long to seed, when to seed etc. Good idea Sat. Could work out nicely.

msxyz
11-23-04, 05:34 AM
What angers me most when I use Torrent is to see my D/L speed barely reaching a few Kbytes/dec while the Upload speed is 10-20 times higher.

True, I've a 10 MBit fiber, but the system should keep some measure of proportion between Download and upload. I don't want to waste my bandwidth for leechers.

Lfctony
11-23-04, 05:50 AM
Using clients like ABC, Azureus, allows you to limit your upload speed. Just limit it to what you see fit.

oldsk00l
11-24-04, 02:12 PM
I read Curmudgeon Gamer,


And, finally, I'm still miffed at the whole "We hate Linux. Except for servers! Server infrastructure good. Client bad!" attitude. It is apparently well-known that Valve has worked with Transgaming to make the Windows Half-life client work better under WineX/Cedega, but can't be bothered to have a proper port done. Argh.

So, really, I hate everyone. Valve. Vivendi. Modern copyright law for software. Karl Rove. And all the crying fanboys. Maybe not equally, but there is plenty of bile to go around. Drink up.

w3rd

The whole thing is about 3 articles down, but a good read.
http://curmudgeongamer.com/

Valve NEEDS to have open distribution of ALL their binaries if this principle is feasible. If the steam servers are just, GONE in 10 years...and you never purchased a physical copy of HL2 then you're screwed.

If the binaries are distributed openly, Valve can at least outsource their "activation" to some other entity should they shut down or get rid of steam.