Feature Request: Bring back the Multiplayer IP entry dialogue

Would you like to see the Multiplayer IP dialogue brought back?

  • Yes

    Votes: 23 85.2%

  • No

    Votes: 4 14.8%
  • Total voters
    27
  • Poll closed .
J

js3862

New member
Please bring this simple feature back. While we know you guys have gone to great lengths to ensure the MP servers are stable and that MP functionality has been greatly improved there are situations that would just make having the ability to type in an IP address much simpler or desirable. Such as:

1. The MP servers are down
2. Two computers are on a large network (more than one router/firewall internally)
3. Someone wishes to host a private session without advertising it on the list server
4. The ability to quickly connect to another computer

It may not get used a lot but having it there would sure be appreciated.
 
Except people tend to vote, "Yes, I want more stuff that won't cost me anything even if I don't understand what it is, or won't ever use it."

If you want to have a private session, the ability already exists.
 
jeffpn said:
Except people tend to vote, "Yes, I want more stuff that won't cost me anything even if I don't understand what it is, or won't ever use it."

If you want to have a private session, the ability already exists.
Click to expand...

It isn't exactly private if you have to publicly list it. Also, if you need to use the list server for all your connections then you're still 100% dependent on KE's list server and therefore 100% affected if it is down.

It's not like this is a new feature that they'd have to figure out, they'd just have to go back and grab the code to put it back. It was part of the MP dialogue since G2 and was only removed in G4.5.
 
I would vote for re-adding the IP option based on the following disclaimer in the G5 manual:

IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THE LIST SERVER: At the time
of this writing we are providing the List Server service on a trial basis. This
service may be modified, interrupted, or cancelled at any time without notice.
In particular, we make no guarantee about the reliability of this service. To use
this service, you may need to obtain product updates. Mention of the List Server in this manual on your RealFlight DVD does not imply that this service
will be available at the time you purchase this product.

Re-adding the ability to connect via IP will help ensure that MP would still be viable in the event the decision is made to discontinue the list server or the list server is down for an extended period of time.
 
js3862 said:
It isn't exactly private if you have to publicly list it. Also, if you need to use the list server for all your connections then you're still 100% dependent on KE's list server and therefore 100% affected if it is down.

It's not like this is a new feature that they'd have to figure out, they'd just have to go back and grab the code to put it back. It was part of the MP dialogue since G2 and was only removed in G4.5.
Click to expand...
I missed that response. (Don't worry, I won't let it happen again. ;) ) If you set a session with a password, it's as good as a private session. I'm not sure why anyone would be bothered by having a session listed. The only ones who could join are those to whom you gave the p[assword. As for the rest.. (expletive removed).

To the 'grabbing code and putting it back': the way that G4 mp is done is totally different than G2. Even the ports have changed, which would be one indication. I'm not sure the old method would be compatable with the new method. Speculation, of course. But I'm playing second speculator, aren't I?

There, you're bumped, and I even voted no!!
 
Another thought: How many people voted 'Yes' because they think that they would no longer have port forwarding issues? You'd have to exclude those votes, no? Sure, there may not be a forwarding verification test done, but the problems would still be there. Your suggestion, as I'm sure you know but others may not, has nothing to do with port forwarding problems.
 
jeffpn said:
... There, you're bumped, and I even voted no!!
Click to expand...

I was sorta counting on that although, being contrary for the sake of being contrary confounds me. I can't for the life of me understand why you would be opposed to providing people with an alternate method of connecting to a host when it doesn't detriment any other features of the application. There's just no negative to adding it back into the application.

In any case, the reinstatement of the IP entry dialogue box shouldn't be anything that complex. Depending on the code it could be no more than a 10 line change. Also, the port numbers used aren't relevant to the IP address dialogue. Port numbering is handled at a different (higher) layer of the OSI model than IP addressing so, your packets can be set to go to whatever port you want, encoded and sent down the stack to whatever IP address you specify.

As for the "(expletive removed)" dismissing the still being 100% dependent on the KE list server, it may not be important or relevant to you that your only option for being able to find or use an MP session is by connecting to the KE list server but, there are quite a few people that would appreciate at least having an option the next time the list server is down for 24+ hours (or whatever amount of time it's down) to still be able to use multiplayer.

The additional thought in your next post is highly unlikely to be the reason people want the IP address box back. Even if it were the reason that somebody voted yes, unless they planned on connecting to other computers using the dialogue box exclusively (very cumbersome) they would still need to have ports opened and forwarded to make use of the MP list server when not wishing to connect to a private session.

And no, a password protected session isn't as good or the same as a private session hosted on an external IP address because:

1. Listing the session isn't private as people can then see the listing and know it's there. If you are forced to advertise it then it's not private, password or not.
2. Being required to list it on the KE server means that the session is probably logged, or could be logged either by KE or someone that just wanted to be nosey.
3. You're still left being dependent on the KE server

Thanks for the bump though.
 
js3862 said:
1. Listing the session isn't private as people can then see the listing and know it's there. If you are forced to advertise it then it's not private, password or not.
Click to expand...
Who as a host would care if it's listed? Okay, you, but why?
js3862 said:
2. Being required to list it on the KE server means that the session is probably logged, or could be logged either by KE or someone that just wanted to be nosey.
Click to expand...
I once was supposed to install digital cable at a tattoo parlor in Dayton, OH. When I told him the box had to be connected to a phone line for return information (this was years ago), he flipped. He told me that the cable company was NOT going to listen in on what went on in his store. So I've seen that type of paranoia before. Yeah, I'm sure KE has nothing better to do than listen in on mp sessions. But just to let EVERYONE at KE know, if you are so bored that you want to log my session, feel free. I just hope you have coffee!
 
js3862 said:
I was sorta counting on that although, being contrary for the sake of being contrary confounds me. I can't for the life of me understand why you would be opposed to providing people with an alternate method of connecting to a host when it doesn't detriment any other features of the application.
Click to expand...
Oops, I forgot to address this point. I'm not being contrary for the sake of being contrary. I don't know why you would assume I was. When I had G2, I never used this feature. It was easier to post a session on the list server than to send people an IP address. It's not an important feature to me. So to answer your poll question, "Would you like to see the Multiplayer IP dialogue brought back?" why would I say yes?
 
jeffpn said:
Who as a host would care if it's listed? Okay, you, but why?
I once was supposed to install digital cable at a tattoo parlor in Dayton, OH. When I told him the box had to be connected to a phone line for return information (this was years ago), he flipped. He told me that the cable company was NOT going to listen in on what went on in his store. So I've seen that type of paranoia before. Yeah, I'm sure KE has nothing better to do than listen in on mp sessions. But just to let EVERYONE at KE know, if you are so bored that you want to log my session, feel free. I just hope you have coffee!
Click to expand...


Who would care, I dunno, maybe someone that just didn't care to have it known they were in a multi-player session. You don't have to be paranoid to want to host a session for a friend or a club and not want it advertised in a list.

As far as logging is concerned, it's pretty reasonable to assume that to some extent KE would log what sessions are created and who hosts, joins and departs those sessions. If for nothing other than troubleshooting purposes it's reasonable to believe they would do so whether they advertise doing so or not.

Really the core of the discussion is the dependency on the KE servers to provide or rather broker your initial connectivity. With the dialogue missing, starting in 4.5, if the MP server goes down for any period of time or they do ever decide to terminate the list server and you haven't upgraded to Gx you're screwed. Other than this idea being used at KE as an incentivizer to upgrade to later versions I can't see a reasonable purpose for having removed the manual IP entry box.

As for why I would assume you were being contrary for the sake of such, until you mentioned that you didn't use it much and didn't see a purpose for it your arguments seemed to center around why other people wouldn't want it or shouldn't vote yes. To state that you just don't think it's a useful feature is fine with me since that's your opinion. However, your position seemed to center around the idea that voting yes would just be a selfish action that was motivated either because people will vote yes for anything just to get it or because people were trying to figure out a way to skirt the port checks on the server. Those comments in conjunction with your comments, about people who would complain about the MP server being down as, "whiney" and if the server is down how they should just 'go paint a room their wives have been nagging them about', in another thread led me to believe you just thought this was a trivial request that should be opposed just for the sake of opposing it. Now that I know you have a personal opinion concerning how much you used the feature in G2 well, now I understand. :rolleyes:



Mr. E
 
Well, I'm going to go join and leave sessions all night then, just to have a little fun with the KE mp logs. Then I'm having dinner with Santa Claus.
 
jeffpn said:
Well, I'm going to go join and leave sessions all night then, just to have a little fun with the KE mp logs. Then I'm having dinner with Santa Claus.
Click to expand...

Sounds like fun! Say hi to Clara for me and let her know the wife and I will bring her dish back on our next trip. We do so love her hot brownie pie. :D
 
Count 1 Vote for me.

I would really be pleased to see this Feature Re-introduced to Realflight. Not only for times where the Server may be down, or connection difficult, but also for times when you do not feel like flying in a field, that Has 3 People editting in it while you are trying to Test And Complete and Obstacle Course, which has had Many Hours of work put into it, and the Creator would like to see someone else try the course.

Not Everyone is a Course Flyer. Fair enough, but when you sign into a Field, that is an Obstacle Course and other members are flying through it, I feel the very least people could do is minimize their Model Change's so as not to have an impact ( Literally ) on the other members in the field, who are trying to enjoy flying in their own way. An occasional edit is fine. But changing model constantly and editting for extended periods of time in an Obstacle course, is not the most considerate thing to do to other members. I am of the Opinion that if you want to Edit Online, Host your own field and don't lag out others because of your own actions.

But if this Feature was returned, there would be no Problems for the Peeps who want to collaborate on Projects and be online for ease of Communication at the same time.

I'm sure no-one want to take the KE server out of the Loop altogether, But I know many would like to be able to use a feature like this, especially the Hard Working Creators ( of whom I am Jealous of their Skillz ).

Keep up the good work everyone. :D

P.s. Please consider this Option for Both G4.5 and G5 as I think Contributers on both Editions would benifit Greatly with the Use of this Feature .
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your feedback everyone. Keep the votes and comments coming. There are only a few more days left to take this poll.


Thanks!




Monday 30.Nov.09

21 votes in favor
03 votes against

7 to 1 or 87.5% positive for returning the IP entry field.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top