Mac GameSpy Follow-up

Programmer Ryan Gordon's IcculusFinger (thanks Frans), the original source for recent stories about GameSpy Mac support (story and story), has more on the problems caused by increased license fees for the Mac edition of GameSpy ("This is literally the only showstopper in ArmyOps 2.2.1 for the Mac. If I had a GameSpy license, I could recompile the game and ship it. As it stands, there isn't a clear or simple solution to this problem in the 2.2.1 timeframe."). The Mac programmer outlines why you can't just "rip GameSpy out," and the problems that would be caused even if you could. After a lengthy discussion of obstacles facing Mac GameSpy support going forward, he also outlines his thoughts on addressing the situation:
The longer term solutions involve an act of subversion. Namely, someone needs to step up: develop and market a product that replaces GameSpy. It's not a secret that GameSpy's SDK doesn't have any real competition at the moment. It's also not a secret that most PC developers would shed no tears for GameSpy if a better alternative came along. I will be daring and say a small, modestly-funded team could pull this off, and if they hit the right PC developers, could gain critical mass with a quickness. The obvious choices for this, if we're being Mac-centric, are either Aspyr or Destineer. I would suggest this might be best done by an independent company that has no sort of Apple affliation as their primary interest... you don't have to like the fact that PC developers have an irrational fear of Mac-oriented companies...and I don't want to have this fight about Linux clients five years from now. Getting a good Triple-A title on the PC to ship with this, Mac port or not, makes this much more intriguing to everyone else, though. After all, there're plenty of reasons to ditch GameSpy on the PC, too; this Mac episode just illustrates it...they could always inflate their prices universally. Smart developers will take notice now when it's still someone else's problem...because tomorrow, it could be their's, too.
View : : :
43 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
Older [  1  2  3  ] Newer
1.
 
No subject
Dec 9, 2004, 10:30
nin
1.
No subject Dec 9, 2004, 10:30
Dec 9, 2004, 10:30
nin
 
So what's the status of ASE? Couldn't they step up to the plate?

http://tds.nin.com/
2.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 9, 2004, 10:36
sir
2.
Re: No subject Dec 9, 2004, 10:36
Dec 9, 2004, 10:36
sir
 
Die, GameSpy, Die!!

Avatar 17694
3.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 9, 2004, 10:48
3.
Re: No subject Dec 9, 2004, 10:48
Dec 9, 2004, 10:48
 
So what's the status of ASE? Couldn't they step up to the plate?

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. "GameSpy doesn't have any real competition", eh? I stopped using GS years ago and have used ASE since then.

m19

Avatar 11406
4.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 9, 2004, 10:58
4.
Re: No subject Dec 9, 2004, 10:58
Dec 9, 2004, 10:58
 
Does ASE work on Mac? Does ASE have an SDK that Dev's can use to integrate server browsing into the game? I'm certainly no developer, but I'm assuming there's a lot of behind the scenes schtuff that GameSpy did with their SDK.

I do agree that someone should step up though. I loved GameSpy many many moons ago, but I rarely visit their site anymore, nor do I use any of their products...which is too bad. The very first thing I purchased online was GameSpy 3D for Quake 2 server browsing.

Those were the days.

This comment was edited on Dec 9, 11:04.
Avatar 9030
5.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 9, 2004, 11:06
5.
Re: No subject Dec 9, 2004, 11:06
Dec 9, 2004, 11:06
 
Yeah I'm a registered ASE user but ASE has two problems:

1. No Mac/Linux/etc. version (as you addressed)
2. ASE is slow to update/support a game. HL2 DM still isn't in there (but CSS is, so it would be a filters trick if nothng else).

This is probably due to it being a single developer in his free time (I presume) so not something developers/publishers want to work with (look at the problems Linux has in the enterprise)

Still, I hope someone steps up to the plate like Gordon up there suggests - hell, if I knew more I'd do it.
6.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 9, 2004, 11:09
6.
Re: No subject Dec 9, 2004, 11:09
Dec 9, 2004, 11:09
 
Oh and also, ASE does have an SDK but like you said - no Mac/Linux stuff
7.
 
Macs and gaming
Dec 9, 2004, 11:25
Jim
7.
Macs and gaming Dec 9, 2004, 11:25
Dec 9, 2004, 11:25
Jim
 
Funny thing is I didn't even know there was a Gamespy for Mac. Well I haven't used Gamespy on the PC in years so I guess I really didn't follow it anyway.

I didn't know that Mac users presented a large enough proportion of the gaming market to even warrant special development for something like this. My impression is that people don't buy Macs to play games. I bought a Mac, and it definately wan't for games, in fact it was the OPPOSITE- so that if my gaming PC gets fuX0r3d I don't lose productivity when I have to get "real" work done.

Jim
8.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 9, 2004, 11:26
8.
Re: No subject Dec 9, 2004, 11:26
Dec 9, 2004, 11:26
 
So what's the status of ASE? Couldn't they step up to the plate?

No, because it's more than just an SDK. You need to have the backend server farm for the master servers too (which ASE doesn't), that or run your own as a game developer (which is probably why GameSpy is so popular -- they do that work for you). This isn't about the user's perspective -- it's about the servers'. Even if you don't use the in game client for server browsing, you're still using the same master servers. Consider it fortunate that GameSpy hasn't tried to lock out other browsers like AOL/MSN/etc do with IM clients.

And, as others point out, ASE isn't cross platform.

Realistically, if anyone was going to challenge GS here they'd have to target the PC market first. Otherwise they simply won't go anywhere. As long as you're sane about your design and coding, porting the SDK to other platforms should not be hideously difficult. There's no way it'll be just a recompile, but it shouldn't be massive development either.

9.
 
No subject
Dec 9, 2004, 12:06
Xii
9.
No subject Dec 9, 2004, 12:06
Dec 9, 2004, 12:06
Xii
 
id was able to go it alone in q3a, without GS. Companies need to stop depending on a shitty 3rd party for their browser/master server.

10.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 9, 2004, 12:18
10.
Re: No subject Dec 9, 2004, 12:18
Dec 9, 2004, 12:18
 
This Just In:

All seven Mac users are outraged!


11.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 9, 2004, 12:19
DG
11.
Re: No subject Dec 9, 2004, 12:19
Dec 9, 2004, 12:19
DG
 
I think just about everything that runs on a Quake3 engine uses the idmaster, that's a lot of titles and a lot of them are triple-A titles. Plus, there's the tie-in thing: id sell the game engine, support for the engine and the master server - even if their master server is losing them money, it's a loss leader because they make it back from sales of the engine.

Anyway, this seems to be a good oppertunity right now. Possibly the larger publishers would be able to provide one as part of the service package. Possibly a startup could do it, bit risky though since probably be a fair bit of capital and developers would (hopefully) have reliability as a priority. Possibly a company (or network of companies) who already has most of the infrastructure could do it - a collection of GSP's perhaps, or some webserver firm looking to diversify.
This comment was edited on Dec 9, 12:27.
Avatar 14793
12.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 9, 2004, 12:42
12.
Re: No subject Dec 9, 2004, 12:42
Dec 9, 2004, 12:42
 
I almost never allow my games to update to the latest GameSpy because of advertising. Battlefield 1942 and Vietnam have their own serverlists, as does Unreal Tournament 2004, Blizzard has Battlenet for a full stable of A-list games. I haven't played the Age of Empires series online on MSN Zone for a while but that was pretty cool, all a game needed was TCP/IP support for you to take advantage of their lobbies for matchmaking. Mac even has GameRanger which provides custom support for Mac games, so all they need to do is keep their server ping capabilities active and they could access the full spectrum of open games. Maybe I haven't been playing games that only have their servers linked to GameSpy, does that include the Clancy series? Shouldn't be a prob if developers aren't too lazy or too addicted to GameSpy's seed money.

13.
 
OpenSource Team
Dec 9, 2004, 12:57
13.
OpenSource Team Dec 9, 2004, 12:57
Dec 9, 2004, 12:57
 
I've been thinking about doing just this for the last four years. However so far my procrastination has been extremely successful!

Personally I'm not pro or anti GameSpy I'm just very frustrated by the lack of innovation of this arena, thats everyone XFIRE, ASE, GameSpy, etc..

We could setup an OpenSource team to write a solution to fill this huge gap.

If you're interested, give me a shout!

14.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 9, 2004, 13:05
14.
Re: No subject Dec 9, 2004, 13:05
Dec 9, 2004, 13:05
 
What most people also don't realize is that a lot of games that have their "own" server lists are using the Gamespy servers just with a different front end.

15.
 
WebEx has a Games Communicator
Dec 9, 2004, 13:20
15.
WebEx has a Games Communicator Dec 9, 2004, 13:20
Dec 9, 2004, 13:20
 
I am a publisher in the Games Industry and I was shown a demo of a Games Communicator from the Director of Digital Content at WebEx.

It is a much more robust solution because it was developed in the business side of the world.

We're planning on using this solution instead of GameSpy.

16.
 
Re: WebEx has a Games Communicator
Dec 9, 2004, 13:59
Tom
16.
Re: WebEx has a Games Communicator Dec 9, 2004, 13:59
Dec 9, 2004, 13:59
Tom
 
It is a much more robust solution because it was developed in the business side of the world.

Wow, that's some great reasoning there.

17.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 9, 2004, 14:08
17.
Re: No subject Dec 9, 2004, 14:08
Dec 9, 2004, 14:08
 
Does ASE work on Mac? Does ASE have an SDK that Dev's can use to integrate server browsing into the game?

I think I remeber the ASE guys pushing something like that so the developers of the shooter "Purge" went with ASE and it ended up being a nightmare for them.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Sometimes I dream about....cheese. Here, have a medkit"
- Half Life 2 NPC
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Both the “left” and the “right” pretend they have the answer, but they are mere flippers on the same thalidomide baby, and the truth is that neither side has a clue."

- Jim Goad
Avatar 10137
18.
 
Re: WebEx has a Games Communicator
Dec 9, 2004, 14:36
18.
Re: WebEx has a Games Communicator Dec 9, 2004, 14:36
Dec 9, 2004, 14:36
 
Tom,
Perhaps you ought to check it out. Solutions designed for business web based collabloration and used by 75% of the worlds corporations can't be wrong.

19.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 9, 2004, 15:23
19.
Re: No subject Dec 9, 2004, 15:23
Dec 9, 2004, 15:23
 
Battlefield 1942 and Vietnam have their own serverlists

IIRC, the BF series uses GameSpy's SDK and master servers. I'm nearly positive that the in-game browser uses GameSpy's SDK -- which is why it's such utter shit.

At some point, maybe people reading this will understand that this article has nothing to do with the stand alone GameSpy executable. But I'm not going to hold my breath.

20.
 
Re: WebEx has a Games Communicator
Dec 9, 2004, 15:34
20.
Re: WebEx has a Games Communicator Dec 9, 2004, 15:34
Dec 9, 2004, 15:34
 
Solutions designed for business web based collabloration and used by 75% of the worlds corporations can't be wrong.

There's several things wrong with that statement. You really should've stuck to the original one -- I'd be willing to bet that a solution designed for business use would be much more reliable than one designed for gaming use.

1) This isn't web based collaboration. It's much more akin to IM or IRC than that. Loosely connected systems, a wide range of things you want to be able to monitor, and the ability to search based on those things (for, oh say, friends, open servers, servers running particular settings, etc.) are all issues that don't exist for "web based collaboration". At least not in any of WebEx's current tools as best I can tell.

2) Internet Explorer is used by 95% of people world wide, so it can't be wrong. Cough.

3) WebEx only has 11,000 customers -- both corporations and individuals. You're telling me that there's fewer than 16,000 corporations in the world? Maybe you meant 75% of Fortune XXXX corps... which is not a statement claimed on their website. The closest you get is "now holds 67% of the marketshare in online meetings and Web conference services".

43 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
Older [  1  2  3  ] Newer