Petition to NOT have Gamespy as multiplayer Host

[OneCrazyCanadian]

I've played civilization 4 since it was released and have continued playing it till this day. There are tons and tons of problems with the connection system implemented by GameSpy

I beg of you Sid Meir to not go with GameSpy again for multiplayer hosting. so if anyone else agrees with me post in this thread and maybe we can make Civ5 playable on the internet again.

OCC

People Against Game Spy

OneCrazyCanadian
Strife40K
The Bad Seed
Thorion
MadDjinn
Cashew
Zhenon
vusak
Twile
Miithos
Captain_Chaos
techathon
Bantams
Attila16881
CptMarvelous
SPART1AT
melignus
ATC1982
kcxiv
s0m3f00l
Dyrr
GenericUserX
MMM94
Karantaner
CanuckSoldier
humptygrumpty
undeadpope
NoMercy
Morgan Pain
MorteEterna
CivAddict
hockeyply410
Ascendant
PhiTrigger
jdaniel
Arrowdel
nutella67
B-29 Bomber
johndango
mcl.denis
Pry87
rob42lou
0zymandibles
thefluffyrocker
Mawson
Gunslinger79
AdkEric
stroppya
Eru Iluvalar
JBAdams
Ruvier
eastmanblues
spacejesus
barrabas
blacksmit049
DocLase
Machupo
feeboo
humptygrumpty
Azrune
nipolian
peaceful ironmonger
Darkpatgtx
Walderschmidt
Shiggs713
Bantams
Phillosopher
Deathedge45
Synt
Kroguy

[Strife40k]

signed.

Gamespy is a terrible multiplayer platform.

[TheBadSeed]

Completely agreed. Gamespy has been a horrible host for CIV4 MP. Always connection issues, crash issues, lag issues, update issues, etc. I'm not surprised CIV4 has had such a hard time with multi-player, as Gamespy adds a stiff handicap.

[Thorian]

Agreed.

Gamespy has always been a bad system. I was astounded when Borderlands used it, hardly supprised me when it took 5hrs plus of troubleshooting and trying 3rd party software b4 I evetually got a game up (thank you Tunngle). Though I've not had many issues with it in Civ4 I can't help but think that continuing with Gamespy would be a very bad choice.

[Kentsfield]

Keep Gamespy. Never had a problem with it.

[MadDjinn]

Gamespy used to be ok, but it sucks in the modern age of networking. There are better choices so please think before you spend.

[Cashew]

Keep Gamespy. Never had a problem with it.

Stone the heretic.






Send Gamespy back to the fiery hell from whence it came.

[paradigmx]

I'm going to get flamed for this, I know it, but I'm gonna say it anyways...

Games for Windows Live

Seriously, it's a proven system, it's very stable, it has all the copy protection you could need, it's very capable of handling expansion content and it has a very robust social system.

The downside is that a port to Mac or Linux might be difficult, but Civ has histrically been a Windows game anyways. Mac ports are done by third parties and Linux never got an official port.

[Zhenon]

I don't think there is any option other than gamespy. Maybe this time if Civ is going to be "powered by gamespy" we can at least have the gs arcade..?

[vusak]

im not a fan of gamespy, ive had to code support for it into a game, and it was a crappy crappy api to work with, maybe it has improved since, but my experience put me off.

as a player its kinda ridiculous to have to forward ports in this day and age (ie. Borderlands - although i think it may have been fixed sometime recently).

[Cashew]

I'm going to get flamed for this, I know it, but I'm gonna say it anyways...

Games for Windows Live.

Couldn't possibly be worse than Gamespy. I say: why not?

[TheBadSeed]

I don't think there is any option other than gamespy. Maybe this time if Civ is going to be "powered by gamespy" we can at least have the gs arcade..?

Actually, there are lots of options other than Gamespy.

IMO, Blizzard is the model to be followed here. Their battle.net was/is 1000 times more stable and viable than gamespy. Maybe Take2 should look into creating their own host servers if they want to be serious about the MP format for CIV.

Gamespy is just bad.

[Twile]

Agreed. No Gamespy. It totally destroyed my Borderlands experience. What's that, you want to see what servers there are? Let me freeze your computer for 15 seconds =D

If it's sold on Steam, then Steam integration would be nice, in addition to the past suite of LAN game offerings.

[Miithos]

Holy crap guys!

Do NOT use Gamespy or any other crappy connection service.

Let us host our own servers!

the internet is PLEANTY fast enough that we can host our own FPS servers.. a CIV server should not be any worse!

PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD !!! DO NOT use Gamespy!

[paradigmx]

I hate personally hosted servers, maybe it just gives me bad flashback to pre-steam days, but almost every server you connected to had some inane set of rules and the op would ban you for beating him.

No, give me public servers please, preferably through Steam or Live!

[Captain_Chaos]

Fully agree with OCC. Petition signed.

CC

[Twile]

I hate personally hosted servers, maybe it just gives me bad flashback to pre-steam days, but almost every server you connected to had some inane set of rules and the op would ban you for beating him.

No, give me public servers please, preferably through Steam or Live!

You can run your OWN server, you know. Just in case the public offerings aren't worthwhile enough.

[paradigmx]

Because I have the spare computing cycles to run my own server, I don't want to hunt down a server every time I want to play.

I don't mind if they have the functionality to run your own server, but they shouldn't do that instead of public servers, they should do it as well as public servers.

[Cashew]

Actually, there are lots of options other than Gamespy.

IMO, Blizzard is the model to be followed here. Their battle.net was/is 1000 times more stable and viable than gamespy. Maybe Take2 should look into creating their own host servers if they want to be serious about the MP format for CIV.

Gamespy is just bad.

Blizzard spends assloads of time and money on Battle.Net though, and it's used in monstrously popular games to offset that cost. While I think Civ V can hang with the big dogs, it's just one game.

Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE to have a system like Battle.Net (with a ladder and everything? Whaaaaat?), but I just don't see that happening.

[bobbuun]

Direct IP play is the way to go. That way, if someone wants to use their own matchmaking service, great! Games can be arranged by Hamachi, or by forums, or however the user wants to.

[Cashew]

How is direct IP the way to go? That is in the current version of Civ, and it's barely used. If people liked it they would have just switched over to it; fact of the matter is that it's inconvenient and time consuming.

[bobbuun]

IMO, Blizzard is the model to be followed here. Their battle.net was/is 1000 times more stable and viable than gamespy. Maybe Take2 should look into creating their own host servers if they want to be serious about the MP format for CIV.

I guess you haven't read up at all on Battle.Net 2. Not at all, Blizzard is not the way they're going. They're making even Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 "MMOs" in that they require continual internet connections (even for single play!). They admit you can "check out" briefly to play offline for short durations, but you always need to be connected at all times.

[bobbuun]

How is direct IP the way to go? That is in the current version of Civ, and it's barely used. If people liked it they would have just switched over to it; fact of the matter is that it's inconvenient and time consuming.

It's the only way myself and *anyone* I know who plays Civ multiplayer does it?

[techathon]

I think windows live is way better. signed

[Cashew]

It's the only way myself and *anyone* I know who plays Civ multiplayer does it?

And how many people was that?

15? 20 at the most?

[Bantams]

add me to the list

[Attila16881]

No Gamespy for multiplayer!!!

[CptMarvelous]

Gamespy is awesome, about as awesome as having to put tk-tk2 after each nickname because of,... well... *Cough Cough* the other reason that GameSpy is awesome

Put me on the list.

[SPART1AT]

totally agreed on that one, should be one of the most important points that have to be changed.

[OneCrazyCanadian]

No more game spy! spread the word people, get as many as you can to sign the thread.

[melignus]

Gamespy is a nightmare to use.

[Zhenon]

I still think Gamespy is the lesser evil. I'll take gamespy over any of the other choices that have been offered in this thread.

- Direct IP'ing has no games list. Unless they wanted to do something like CivRev on Xbox where the game/system matches players?

-Battle.net (or whatever) isn't practical since that would mean 2K games would have to create/invent their own server network for one video game...?

And btw, whatever Peer2Peer network you use would still have the same problems as GameSpy -- firewall blockage, cannot connect to host, etc.

[kcxiv]

my first post is, give the people what they want.

[ATC 1982]

I will sign it

[s0m3f00l]

/signed

Have you ever tryed to play borderlands online on a PC what a ****show!

[Dyrr]

signed no gamespy

[GenericUserX]

Gamespy is stupid, I hope they don't use it.

[MMM94]

/signed

Though I have seen games where GameSpy does it's job.

[Karantaner]

signed - please no Gamespy!

[CanuckSoldier]

I don't think there is any option other than gamespy. Maybe this time if Civ is going to be "powered by gamespy" we can at least have the gs arcade..?

Oh there are always options Z, like someone said here, Games for Windows or just go it alone and I'm sure other Take2/2K games have servers.

Just as important as dumping Gamespy we really need to dump the p2p model for a TBS strategy game. Data in this game is critical and no data packets can be dropped or they have to be resent. So lets hope for a Server/Client model as well, that way a weakly connected player only has to have one connection to the server and not many connections to each player in the game.

And sign me up :P

CS