welll gamespy it looks like. . .

[ELITEofGAZOZ]

For me the most important point is:

Can I still chat with my friends and can I still learn new people online as in STW?

If no, than every development in game speed, no downs of servers anymore etc. doesn´t matter me.

I hate anonymous online games.

[evilc]

i agree. a lobby and direct IP gaming is fine.

[Kraellin]

bsm,
yup. i DO understand. i'd like direct ip also. in fact, why not take it one step further and allow folks to build websites which ARE dedicated servers. and the hell with gamespy and all the other heavy advertising sites. lol, i can just see it now; i've built an M:TW server on homestead or geocities and while we're playing a nice 3v3 up pops 6 popup ads on everyone's game ;)
ok, i'm getting away from your origination here. another possibility is an irc server, though, i'm guessing they'd also do routing like a game server would. and i dunno how gamespy does cd keys and verification, but didnt HEAT verify for legit games? i seem to recall they did. are you sure gamespy doesnt?

and yes, i played on HEAT. also played on mplayer, gamespy, the zone, compuserve, and GEnie. i was even on that dedicated c-64 network 15 years ago or so ;) and if you really want to understand how long i've been doing this, i used to play multiplayer on university mainframes back in 72 and 73 ;)

you may be right about how stuff is routed on dedicated game networks like gamespy. i couldnt swear to it. i got the idea that it did it like i said, but that game my friend made his own lobby for had both online ability and direct ip. so he may have just tapped into the online server portion and not the direct ip. if they arent handing off the entire process, then they prolly shld. when the game is over you simply run a routine from the code to hook everyone back up to the server. hmm, the more i think about it, the more i think you may be right. there's got to be some hook maintained with the main server to continue showing that folks are in a game so they may indeed be keeping the routing going on thru the main server to keep it 'open'. hmmm....

it also strikes me that if one could do a lan game on stw that one shld be able to trick it into an internet game. anyone tried this? might take some port changes to do. i'm a complete idiot on lans so i'm prolly way off base here.

K.


------------------
The only absolute is that there are no absolutes.

[evilc]

have a page on the medievil site where players can post their IP's and you can enter it and join them directly. having such an IP database doesn't rely on any external software and will mean people can play if the lobby goes down. Of course, you still need a lobby, without it, would we really have had the fun we have had?

p.s. Lordted agrees and says g*yspy sux.

[BSM_Skkzarg]

Kaellin,

You are in a small cave of twisty little passages.......... ROFL. Your an old timer - I bet you remember that phrase!

Seriously - heat.net did verify game versions - just as Mplayer and gamespy supposedly do. But they only check version numbers. Right now, you can get a rip of, lets use Mechwarrior 3, install it, run it, and provided its the latest version - play it multiplayer on gamespy. Gamespy version checking assume that the built in copy protection (on cd - usually safedisc or some such) is valid, thus it is extremely limited. Enough so that it provides no real benefit. In addition, CD's are burnable - and one can burn the cd and play the game off of backup copies. Neither EAPlay nor gamespy or anyone else can stop that - thus they added the serial checking on EAPlay to insure that no duplicates were used to play online in violation of the Licensing Agreement. Again, Gamespy is not equipped to maintain a db of valid serials and check each connection. So copy protection is nill on going there.

As to the question gamespy routing, my understanding is that yes their lobby/gmae servers do pass the packets. That being the case - lag will occur - especially if the lobby gets crowded, alot of games are being played and/or if they give us only a small portion of resources (limited resources on a single server, or a single dedicated server, etc.)

Since they are doing TCP/IP gaming anyway - thru directplay - there is no reason that you need the "middleserver". All they have to do is set up the MP game to connect to a user supplied IP instead of hardcoding the gamespy connection. That way, the 2 machines talk (with no pass thru), create and play the game as they do now - simply cutting out the extra "destination".

For those who wonder what I am talking about - here is an illustration.
You are playing on Computer A in New York. Your playing your friend 3 blocks away who just got the game. He is on Computer B.
Gamespy is computer C - and the server M:TW is allotted is located in sunny Florida. If you are forced to use Gamespy, your connection looks like this:

A C B

Thus the info you send goes from your house to florida and then back to your friend 3 blocks away. Lets say that ole Computer C is kinda busy - you get lag... Or that Gamespy goes away (temporarily or permanently) - guess what - no multiplayer.

Direct TCP/IP connections look like THIS:

A B

With this, you and your friend get online, connect to each other and play. The only time it won't work - is when your ISP is down.

Activision should protect their software - and in this case - do so by having direct IP games check and insure that they do not have the same install serial - thus they cant be the same game played in 2 places (using copies).

If they are doing LAN games, and TCP games, its not difficult to add the direct IP window.

Qapla!

------------------
BSM_Skkzarg
"ARG when I'm Happy, ARG when I'm Sad, ARG when I'm good or bad. ARG!"
"ARG to port! ARG to starboard! Arg from stem to stern! ARG!"

[Kraellin]

twisty little passages.... hmmm, sounds like Adventure to me. north, south, east, west...i always ended back where i started ;)

k. if gamespy and other servers are doing it that way, then i'd have to totally agree. hell, i agree anyways even if they're doing it the way i thought.

the other plus with doing direct ip was that folks could set up web sites listing icq #'s of those that liked to play. you could just go to one of those sites and find other users without the need to log onto something like Heat or mplayer, which might or might not be working at the time. i think icq even used to have a feature for finding folks that shared game interests.

i know that when Heat was acting up we'd sometimes move to microsoft's The Zone and play direct in their tcp/ip setup servers, but that was about as bad as Heat at times. so normally when things were lagging on Heat, we'd simply meet there and then set up a direct ip game.

and as long as we're at it, let's add in the feature for xferring files thru the game. maps, patches and so on could all be sent and auto-installed thru a host, particularly if it's a direct ip connection. and, since there are going to be 12 playable factions, how bout increasing game capability to 6v6 in multi, and, allowing for more options like joining a game in progress, more host options like being able to boot an individual at least from the setup, and some differentiation between 'reserves' and 'reinforcements'. these are two distinct things. reserves are those units you have brought with you for the battle, but which you've left hidden off the main playing field. they can enter at your beck and call or as you need to replace units. no lag, no wait till you rout x number of units and so on. you brought 24 units for your battle, but since we can only get 16 on the board at one time, let's allow these extra 8 units to be called forth into battle as needed, as long as you maintain the 16 units on the field at one time rule.

reinforcements are units that didnt really come with you at the onset. it's the old cavalry to the rescue in the nick of time type thing. they might come from anywhere, within reason, and show up at any old time, again maintaining the 16 unit rule. this would be particularly good when playing some of those castle maps or river crossing maps.

and as long as we're on the subject, why the 16 unit rule? and why only 8 players? if there's a limit on the sprites or something like that, at least allow us in smaller player number games to have more units on the field. if i'm playing a 1v1, for instance, and there is a sprite limit, i could in that 1v1 conceivably have 64 units and so could my opponent and still only have 128 sprites on the field as in a 4v4. thus it also stands to reason that we could also have 8v8 games where the players only have 8 units and still not exceed the sprite limit, if there is such a thing. (i know there used to be in the older machines...sprites = 16, bobs = almost unlimited)

CA, i know we bug you to death on this stuff and i know yer mid-stream with M:TW and i also know not everyone at CA has the authority to implement just any old thing they want, so tell the boss to bring his rosy red, er, cheeks into the .org and have it out with us :) i mean, hey, why isnt he here anyways? why are all these other sites getting the interviews and the pr? bring da man in and let's have a chat (read: roast ;) seriously, it would be nice to see the main man come to the true heart of the shogun community. we'll then notify gamespot, gamemagX, gamesite thisnthat, that THEY shld come here if they want the true skinny :)

michael, graham, you guys are welcome here, ya know. and if the users here get too cranky we'll just sic shiro and cat on them ;)

K.


------------------
The only absolute is that there are no absolutes.

[ShadeWraith]

In Ghost Recon you have the option of joining a game through a common foyer (Ubi.com) or setting up your own I.P games. As Ubi.com sux, what I tend to do is log into the Ubi foyer and advertise an I.P game and wait for peeps to join. This works really well, you can use the foyer to chat etc. but still set up your own I.P games when you want to. I think this would be the preferred option if we had a choice for MTW.


Wraith

[evilc]

thats what i said, i agree

[JAG]

hmmmmmmmmmm :/ . . i am still unsure!

------------------
crying is good in a boy . . . it shows they are sensitive

crying is not good in a man . . . it shows they are a wuss!!!!!


WarlordWarrior

[Sword_Monkey]

Quote Originally posted by BSM_Skkzarg:
Kaellin,
As to the question gamespy routing, my understanding is that yes their lobby/gmae servers do pass the packets. That being the case - lag will occur - especially if the lobby gets crowded, alot of games are being played and/or if they give us only a small portion of resources (limited resources on a single server, or a single dedicated server, etc.)
[/QUOTE]

Are you sure about this? I've been using gamespy for at least three years for playing 3D shooters and I was always under the impression that all gamespy is is a match making service.

It doesn't make any sense that it would handle routing the packets because that could kill peoples traceroutes by an enormous factor. Since gamespy built its business initially by providing an easy to use matchmaking for games who's ingame match making was lacking (*ahem* Quake 3 *ahem*), why would they have intentionally hamstrung the efficacy of the product by hosing everyone's ping rate?

Regardless, direct TCIP/IP connection is a must as far as I'm concerned. When I want to play games with some friends across town, I don't want to have to go through a service regardless of how good or bad it is.

Copy protection is best served by doing what Q3 and Half-Life do: company servers that verify serials before the game but no other interference. It's fast and relatively unobtrusive.'

[BSM_Skkzarg]

Swordmonkey,

Yes, I am fairly confident in that claim. Try watching the packets you get while playing during a gamespy session - they never come directly from your opponent, but rather have a similiar (but not always exact) IP as your gamespy attachment. Since the first 3 (out of 4) segments of the IP are the same, this indicates the hook and the passing of data packets.

It is unfortunate that this occurs, because it causes issues within MP gaming. Its a price we pay for not raising a large ruckus when the trend toward this started occuring. Perhaps now that ppl are beginning to see the negative side of the equation, enough outcry will be raised so that game companies will start giving us the ability to more freely play as we choose. It used to be a MP game did not ship without a direct TCP/IP connection ability. Now, we gamers are reduced to asking for it to protect our ability to play MP games.

Qapla!

------------------
BSM_Skkzarg
"ARG when I'm Happy, ARG when I'm Sad, ARG when I'm good or bad. ARG!"
"ARG to port! ARG to starboard! Arg from stem to stern! ARG!"