DescentBB

Hey everyone, in working on the D3 patch I'm wondering if people see any value in bringing back PXO in some form? I could get rankings chat, etc. up, but would anyone use it? Please let me know what you think.

Kevin

I voted Yes, with Rankings:

Yes - Only because it will be a much simpler way for newer players to access online multiplayer(in this I'm assuming by PXO you also mean being able to access it directly through D3). Plus it would bring back some nostalgia

Rankings - Why the hell not. They created some fun drama. If you don't like being a target, use a mask.

I'd definitely use it. How can you do this though?

yes - with or without rankings. this is the easiest way for new players to find online games. the MOTD and/or people in pxo chat take it from there as it used to be.

Kevin Bentley wrote:I could get rankings chat, etc. up, but would anyone use it? Please let me know what you think.

Kevin

Chat would be great along with a server browser? But not as cluncky as the first interface was.

Yes,

roughly speaking how many active player are left?

Of course it would be great to bring back PXO, mainly so we can join games with the server browser in D3. Other stuff doesn't matter that much to me, as long as it is easy to join a server without closing D3 or running some third party packet tool.

I voted Yes, With Rankings.

If you bring back the chat, are there plans to change the general configuration / layout of it? I mean, leave the \"static\" custom graphic interface of 640x480 (in the PXO chat the text is huge and there is a lot of scrolling) to say a native GUI window management structure that just pulls from Windows / Linux / Mac / etc. (no custom D3 stuff).

Duper wrote:Chat would be great along with a server browser? But not as cluncky as the first interface was.

clunky wouldn't matter, as long as the server(s) is/are back up. if we'd get the *ahem*source*cough* to "Parallax Online.d3c", we could fit the interface to our needs/wants ourselves . this would even allow to integrate more irc channels into the d3 interface, custom serverlists etc. (keywords: gate, vortex and the other 2).

Skyalmian wrote:If you bring back the chat, are there plans to change the general configuration / layout of it? I mean, leave the "static" custom graphic interface of 640x480 (in the PXO chat the text is huge and there is a lot of scrolling) to say a native GUI window management structure that just pulls from Windows / Linux / Mac / etc. (no custom D3 stuff).

use vortex for windows, d321go for linux, and uhh *shrug* for mac . for changing it: what i posted above.

Floyd, I disagree. The old PXO Chat room was cumbersome and it was difficult to follow chat if there were more than 3 people typing at the same time. iirc, there was no scroll bar to follow chat for more than about 8 lines. Functionality clunky.

who would be responsible for the tracking server?

No. PXO was bad even when it was working. I didn't bother w/ it after a single glance, went straight to Gate.

I agree that it would be handy for newbies to get initial contact (how many newbies are there anyway ?), but I don't see a lot people running the game just to chat. Something like Vortex is way more usefull.

An in-game game tracker support (configurable !) would be handy, point the default to gamespy and/or d3.descent.cx.

If you have to have in-game chat, drop in an IRC client preconfigured to point to the gamesurge D3 channels.

I would appreciate to leave out the ranking, that stuff got heavily abused back in the days.

Let's just say I stopped playing D3 because of PXO going away. I didn't feel like bothering with Kali or some third party add on. Most games today have the multiplayer community built right into the game - I think that's a value add.

Grendel wrote:I agree that it would be handy for newbies to get initial contact (how many newbies are there anyway ?)

There are still a few noobs out there, if not to D3 there are others who have played D3 but are new to D3 multiplayer (like me).

Also be aware that the current commercial releases of D3, such as the one on Good Old Games, have had the PXO support removed.

I have never used PXO when it was available but have since used Vortex and GameSpy Arcade to find and join games. It works for me.

I voted yes,
and by the way, how INCREDIBLY COOL that Kevin is working on D3 again!!!!!!

THANK YOU!

Of course YES, with rankings - this would be AWESOME!

Grendel wrote:No. PXO was bad even when it was working. I didn't bother w/ it after a single glance, went straight to Gate.

I agree that it would be handy for newbies to get initial contact (how many newbies are there anyway ?), but I don't see a lot people running the game just to chat. Something like Vortex is way more usefull.

An in-game game tracker support (configurable !) would be handy, point the default to gamespy and/or d3.descent.cx.

If you have to have in-game chat, drop in an IRC client preconfigured to point to the gamesurge D3 channels.

I would appreciate to leave out the ranking, that stuff got heavily abused back in the days.

x2 to most of this.

We need an in-game tracker. In-game chat would be nice, but the PXO chat interface was pretty clunky. And ranks are silly. Stats are fine, but "ranks" encourage people to do things like hang back in CTF and build up an absurd efficiency but hurt their team in the process.

I agree that the chat was clunky in PXO, but in my defense the UI elements I had to work with were very limited.

Regardless of what I do with PXO, I can make a gate compatible game browser that works just like PXO or direct TCP/IP pretty easy, I'll just have to get the current server list from gate, then query each IP when building the game list. Chat is fairly easy as it's just IRC with a few tweaks (I can make it talk to any IRC server with a few adjustments).

Then gate support would work just like PXO, it would just be a different connection option when you go to multiplayer.

Kevin Bentley wrote:I agree that the chat was clunky in PXO, but in my defense the UI elements I had to work with were very limited.

Hehe, no need to defend. Back then, that was a fairly new idea. Tribes was about the only game doing that then. (Quake 3 too iirc) It was functional and finding a game wasn't tough at all. TCP/IP as still a new idea in gaming then too; or in transition away from p2p.

And, you definitely have tools now that are better than the home brewed ones you had then. .. back then, I don't think there were many tools TO do what game developers were trying to do then.

I am pretty sure everyone would stick to using IRC clients and Vortex for chatting, but bringing back PXO will open up multiplayer to those players who have never played before - and there are still lots of people buying the game for the first game and trying it out.

Yes, keeping IRC would be the best since any other protocol would require a chat program running on every platform (which actually is a problem right now with Vortex, but at least you can use any IRC client on Linux or Mac).

PJB wrote:I am pretty sure everyone would stick to using IRC clients and Vortex for chatting, but bringing back PXO will open up multiplayer to those players who have never played before - and there are still lots of people buying the game for the first game and trying it out.

X2

I see D3 on sale at the local 7/11 (convenience store) for 10 bucks.(Retribution and Mercs bundled) So it's still out in the market place!

with or without rankings is fine

I agree with the idea of somehow integrating IRC to use current chat rooms. I don't like rankings for the reasons listed before.

I would love to see native working multiplayer support put back in. I think it's vital for beginners to be able to find games easier. I'd guess a large percentage of people drop the game because they don't think anyone's playing w/ PXO dead.

Rankings would probably be a good idea to keep people interested. There is already a stats effort at d3stats.de that perhaps could be migrated.

Rankings = Matchmaking?

if as before, no. It was simply a list as to who was top man in stats.

i'm just wondering.. what would happen if someone decided to stop paying for the bandwidth to the servers, a la tabula rasa?

Would the alternative be gamesurge, or a different type of tracker?


I'd use it but I'm thinking of what would happen afterwards if the servers went down.

wow pxo!! that may bring back many players that don't know about trackers
Ehm and it will be like old pxo or new address and all?

PXO chat is just an IRC server with tweaks, I know because back in the day I knew how to connect to it using mIRC.

would spark some activity, the hotter the pot the easier to make soup

Suggestion - make the PXO module compatible with current services/tools used for D3:

• IRC for chat
• d3.descent.cx (and maybe master.gamespy.com) for server/game tracking
• d3stats.de for ranking

Then, the PXO module will be optional but still useful.

Well, looks like the Yeses have it. :P And that makes 19 people (67%) with my vote. :P

YES to Parallax Online. It just makes it easier to find a game and play.

YES to the Ranking System. The Ranking System was fun, but then the players with a little amount of talent and a high amount of arrogance (or maybe high talent, high arrogance) ruined it for everyone else.

Matchmaking would be a cool idea, but if you don't have time or can't be bothered with it, then it doesn't matter. Matchmaking is non-essential at this point, IMO.

Only thing I would do differently is to eliminate the chat system from Parallax Online.d3c and have people use an IRC client if they want to talk about sandwiches. Also, each server on the new PxO shouldn't be a PXO-only server and people should be able to connect from anywhere.

To be quite honest with you, Mr. Bentley :) someone should just finish a new game without all the bugz and design flaws that D3 had. But since you're just making a patch for D3, you should fix the net code (including better support for and all the bugz with permissible client/server). :P And fix the weapons. :P

Burlyman wrote:To be quite honest with you, Mr. Bentley someone should just finish a new game without all the bugz and design flaws that D3 had. But since you're just making a patch for D3, you should fix the net code (including better support for and all the bugz with permissible client/server). And fix the weapons.

this totally fits the topic and on top of that, you should start helping them with your tremendous insight on all "issues" listed.

the chat is to keep not to talk about sandwiches, but to communicate with newbies. ugh. yes, they can do that in the games. no, they can't join the games if they don't know about 1.4/1.5. yes, this happened in 90% of all cases.

Burlyman wrote: Matchmaking would be a cool idea, but if you don't have time or can't be bothered with it, then it doesn't matter. Matchmaking is non-essential at this point, IMO.

eewww. This isn't a console.

Burlyman wrote: To be quite honest with you, Mr. Bentley someone should just finish a new game without all the bugz and design flaws that D3 had. But since you're just making a patch for D3, you should fix the net code (including better support for and all the bugz with permissible client/server). And fix the weapons.

He's doing this for free remember. Also, check the list of completed fixes that they've worked on. HERE and Here

Kevin Bentley wrote:Don't worry guys, I want to get lots of bugs fixed, and I'd love to improve the graphics too. First we want to get things functional, but I don't plan to stop there...

I voted, YES, without rankings. Only because I laugh DEAD or alive.

Floyd wrote:

Burlyman wrote:To be quite honest with you, Mr. Bentley :) someone should just finish a new game without all the bugz and design flaws that D3 had. But since you're just making a patch for D3, you should fix the net code (including better support for and all the bugz with permissible client/server). :P And fix the weapons. :P

this totally fits the topic and on top of that, you should start helping them with your tremendous insight on all "issues" listed. :roll:

Well, since your knowledge of Descent is so far above mine, I'll let you all have that honor, if there is any to be had. >_< I'm sorry I angered the deities of Descent for going slightly off-topic for 2 nanoseconds. 9_9

Burly, we just don't want to hammer Kevin (and friends) with a \"want list\".

By all means bring it back. I was very young and I wasn't allowed to play online, but when I could, PXO was gone. I'd click on it every once in a while. In total, I was stuck for 9 years without multiplayer until I found Kaizerwolf. Then I needed to update to 1.4. I got luckey finally, but I'm willing to bet that there are others that were like me. It would only be a matter of bringing everyone to 1.5 so they can click and go without having to download 3rd party stuff and website game trackers, but how can we tell them without them hinting that they would have loved to play?

Am I going off on something completely different here? I may be trying to say that our flow of newbies might not change because the word is slow to move (or maybe I was. :/). Hmm, if we were to tell Interplay and GOG to advertise that 1.5 is good to go, then we may be able to rake in some fresh meat, I mean NEW PILOTS! Yes! Yes...

@PyroJockey, Don't worry, you will get better. If you have a smooth setup, you'll pick it up in a week if you try to fly often. At least, that's how long it took me. Then it just keeps steadly improving.

A little history from me, in those 9 years, same campaign over and over again. Never downloaded a level. Didn't get Mercs till 7 years after D3's origial release. Dedicated!

S13driftAZ wrote:Rankings = Matchmaking?

Perhaps along with usage pattern tracking, to group up players likely to play at the same time?

We don't have enough people for matchmaking. It'd get boring playing against the same guy over and over. We have just enough players to keep the pilots you see mixed up a bit.

There should also be the option of seeing player names while looking at the server list. IDK if that was in the original PXO. Was it in the original?