Ok, so Live is somehow so different from every other system used to push bits on the internet that it would take an enormous amount of work to add and maintain that as well as well as letting the current system tag along for the ride. Fair enough. As I mentioned, I'm not a game developer.Would FSXI moving to Live impact third-party developers in any way? Would programs such as Squawkbox still be able to cater to VATSIM users without requiring the developer to go through extra hoops (some sort of Microsoft Live Verified -program or what have you) simply because the multiplayer matchup system built into FSXI was based on a service you have to pay for? Or would FSXI still allow add-on software to "tap in" and direct network traffic the way they do now, completely ignoring Gamespy (or Live) and for free? Basically, to allow users to sidestep the payment requirement for online play?Thanks for your time Phil!

http://blogs.ign.com/MGS_HiredGun/2007/05/04/53959/ certainly indicates some of that is possible. I dont fully understand how all of the uses of the MP functionality in FSX are exploited by the community ( I wonder of anyone does ) so its hard to see if this is, more or less, a lateral step. But it is certainly worth discussing.

As far as I can tell from reading that article, you can't run or connect to an online Halo 2 (Windows) server without a Live account - even if it's a free one (although as far as I know the Live Silver account does not allow online multiplayer gaming). In any case, the article does not have any information in it that would suggest that what I was asking was possible with FSXI if it used Live. If anything, everything the article instructed end users to do involved Live this or Live that. You can probably run it on an internetless LAN without Live access, but that's not something FSXI users would be doing (those who this topic interests, anyway).The main point in my question was and remains: if FSXI uses Live, will third parties still be able to entirely BYPASS FSXI's Live interface and write code (with the same level of knowledge and effort as now) that controls FSXI's multiplayer aspect directly (like Squawkbox does / will do with FS9 / FSX, which I believe works on the basis that every person connecting to the VATSIM network is actually hosting a local session, and Squawkbox simply makes the client "think" other clients are connecting to IT). I DO understand if you or anyone else simply does not know the answer, since I suspect at this stage Live in FSXI is just an idea being bounced around and there's no hard code or other evidence to indicate what moving to it would mean for third party add-ons dealing with the online multiplayer aspect of FSXI.Therefore this is indeed a topic worth discussing, because I have a hunch that going with Live for FSXI will not get support from VATSIM users if it means everything that has to do with online multiplayer has to be run through Live. The problems we are currently facing have to do with Gamespy's lobby / chat / network handling, none of which to my knowledge are used in the FSX version of Squawkbox (which is currently being developed and tested). Going with Live in FSXI would therefore not solve anything for VATSIM users, because they won't be suffering from Gamespy's components in the first place. In the worst case scenario it could prevent them from moving on to FSXI entirely (for their VATSIM activities, anyway).And while I speak of VATSIM / Squawkbox users, I don't mean that they would be the only ones affected. I'm sure there are other communities or third party software that could potentially suffer, I just don't know about them.

I dont know enough about VATSIM to know how to answer you. A VATSIM person would have to investigate.However, if the idea of Live doesnt taste good - then the free services remain as the only solution.So I suggest starting to engage with GameSpy and voice your complaints as a customer. Get VATSIM as an organization to do the same. If MS is the only end complaining, then GameSpy doesnt get enough data to prioritize the problem. That would be far more productive than just ranting.If you've been watching, we started doing just that on driver issues and it appears to have had some positive impact. At least recent driver releases contain data about FSX and certain bugs, indicated they are known and acknowledged. The customer has power, if they use it correctly.

MS should be big enough to make an FSXOnline service on their own, not relying on a crappy service like GameSpy.

MS is not FS. FS is not staffed to own building out network layers, we by definition have to rely on someone else's.Xbox Live, now that it is on the PC, is exactly that service.

>So I suggest starting to engage with GameSpy and voice your>complaints as a customer. Get VATSIM as an organization to do>the same. If MS is the only end complaining, then GameSpy>doesnt get enough data to prioritize the problem. That would>be far more productive than just ranting.No doubt the message would go through better if both the developer / publisher as well as the customers would voice their issues. This wouldn't however involve VATSIM as an organization. As I explained before, my understanding is that VATSIM and its members do not / will not suffer from whatever GameSpy components FSX contains as far as their virtual ATC hobby goes (since to my knowledge Squawkbox and FSInn do not use them).However, IF Aces' solution to the problems "regular" users are having with lousy lobby functionality and connection handling due to GameSpy is to move to Live in FSXI, AND that move means that third parties will no longer be able to write programs such as Squawkbox (at all or without extra licensing or "Live Qualification" costs / requirements), then it might become a problem for VATSIM as an organization. I don't speak for them, though. Or anyone else other than myself, for that matter. I just figured I had something to say on the topic and did so :)Plus at this point no one seems to actually know how moving to Live would change things. I do hope that as soon as someone at your end does, though, they'll share it with us end users before the final decision is made. That way we will have a chance to say wether it sounds like a good or a bad idea - your asking us how we'd feel about moving to Live suggests that you're genuinely interested in community feedback on this matter. That's always nice to know.>If you've been watching, we started doing just that on driver>issues and it appears to have had some positive impact. At>least recent driver releases contain data about FSX and>certain bugs, indicated they are known and acknowledged. The>customer has power, if they use it correctly.Oh, absolutely - and to that end, I'd like to inquire if you might have contact information (e-mail address will do) for the person who has represented GameSpy when Aces and GS have worked to implement FSX's lobby and networking? If you have been in contact with multiple representatives from GS, the one closest to actual code (a product manager? Project lead?) would probably be the best match. I seriously doubt a sales rep would have time or interest to deal with something like this.I ask because I took a look at GameSpy's website and their support section for "Powered by GameSpy In-Game Browsers" says to contact the maker of the game for support on any issues within the game, including the GameSpy browser (in our case that means at least the lobby and chat during multiplayer sessions):http://support.gamespyarcade.com/ics/suppo...?questionID=193There is no separate section for problems with the "server end" of GameSpy In-Game Browsers, although I honestly don't know wether it's the client-side or the server-side of GameSpy's implementation that is causing all the problems in the first place. All I know is that there's GameSpy at both ends, and THEIR support is telling me to contact YOUR support (they might mean the publisher too, the wording "game maker" might just be the simplest way of saying "anyone responsible for that game coming out to the market").Since you already said that we should contact GameSpy, I'm going to assume "contacting the game's maker" would not accomplish anything beyond what has been discussed in this thread :) The next logical step is therefore to go beyond GameSpy's official support services, to whomever YOU guys dealt with while implementing GameSpy software into FSX.Unless of course that contact information is confidential, at which point this will become exceedingly difficult :(

It's NOT a Gamespy Issue ( amazingly)The message "Host cancelled session" is exactly that ... the guy hosting the session closed FSX and probably started up something else like "Grand Thieft Auto"Unfortunatly this is a typical problem with many of the sessions hosted by players ... host has a short attention span.Try slecting a session that has more players in it, as it may have been running longer -- or even better -- HOST your own session.At least then, you will never get the above message !!!

no... I get booted off of gamespy and then log back on to find the exact same players in the exact same sessions... It's not always because they actually canceled the session...

What you describe IS a possibility, however, in the cases we're talking about here it is not what has happened and it IS a genuine problem. Wether it is GameSpy's fault or not is still in the air, but they're the most likely party to blame since at the time of these error messages we're dealing with GameSpy's software. How do we (I) know it's a real problem?1) I try connecting to a server. Either the connection attempt fails right away or it starts loading. How far it goes (in some cases it gets all the way to the briefing room) seems to be entirely random.2) When it fails, it usually tells me the "Host cancelled the session". There are a couple of other error messages that pop up occasionally, but most of the time they are reserved for other events (such as the "It appears you have connected to GameSpy from another computer" one most often shown when leaving the briefing room).3) Despite the host "supposedly" closing the connection (and as you suggest, going to play GTA or what have you), their session is still shown in the server list. Its ping and player figures are still being updated, so the host is most definitely there. Someone might still be sceptical, but no one can dispute the final piece of evidence: should I actually be able to connect to the server on some subsequent attempt, I can see "copies" of MYSELF in the server's user list (and they're calculated into the total number of players currently connected to the server to boot). Those are ghosts of my previous connection attempts. This would suggest that on the host's side I can be seen connecting succesfully, but then at some point the client side code figures it's not getting through, drops the connection and blames it on the host.

SIMPLE - Do NOT connect to Gamespy !!!Use DIRECT CONNECT, and then Gameapy has NOTHING to do with anything.The Host can still ADVERTISE his session on Gamespy, by connecting to Gamespy, and making sure he gives his IP in the game description.Then, anyone who wants to JOIN that session, can use DIRECT CONNECT, and connect directly to the host, bypassing gamespy logging into Gamespy at all.HOWEVER -The Gamespy server have improve a lot over the past 6 months, and are actually now quite reliable. If YOU are getting disconnected from Gamespy, it is most likely YOUR Computer or YOUR Internet connection at fault, so no matter how you connect, you will still experience the same problems.To be a Flight Sim Pilot, you also have to know a little about Networking, Routers etc.Lastly -- just to save you wating your time, DO NOT waste your time calling MICROSOFT or GAMESPY about these issues. (1) Gamespy will NOT assist you, and will refer you to Microsoft, the game provider.(2) Microsoft Tech Support can really do NOTHING to help you, apart from tie up your phone for 3 hours.Bottom line is, if you have gamespy Problems, DITCH Gamespy, but you will still probably have problems, as your Initial problem was NOT Gamespy -- Gamespy just made you aware of your Connection Problems.Geoff

Maybe I'm missing something - it would seem to me that the "Connect Directly" option is only available AFTER logging on to GameSpy? In your post you said "Do NOT connect to Gamespy" and to "Use DIRECT CONNECT" instead, however this would appear impossible to me? Or is there perhaps some way to access the "Connect Directly" option without logging on to GameSpy?Even if that was possible, however, it would mean that you wouldn't be able to use text chat or see the user list (well, you'd see it but it wouldn't update with people coming and going). This is because the text chat and user list are run centrally through GameSpy - they're not maintained by the host. Voice chat would still work though.Although voice is used quite extensively, there are times when the text chat can help clarify broken voice instructions. It would be a shame to have to go without it. Especially since the majority of the GameSpy problems I myself have relate to connecting to hosts and moving from the in-game session to the briefing room or lobby - I rarely run into connection problems DURING a session. And that's when the text chat would come in handy.

>Yeah, and gamespy's fickleness or just plain>non-functionality is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes>to multiplayer bugs sadly, none of which were addressed in>sp1. I firmly believe FSX's multiplayer is a big step in the>right direction though, and that by FS13 or 14 singleplayer>flight will be seen as an alternative rather than the norm. I>hope the expansion pack brings a lot of bug fixes and new>multiplayer functionality to the game. An ability to disable>the sending of weather data from host to clients is needed as>well, it would allow the use of activeky in multiplayer.>>And yes there's direct IP connection functionality, the lame>part is that you have to actually log into gamespy to access>it. A poor decision imo. Some people prefer to be 'off the>grid' now and then. :)>>-Mike>No, you do NOT have to log into Gamespy to use Direct Connect.ON the gamespy login screen, select LAN login, and just supply a username.It might have been clearer if it was not just labled LAN, which implies LOCAL area Network.... It's WAN as well !!

>No, you do NOT have to log into Gamespy to use Direct>Connect.>>ON the gamespy login screen, select LAN login, and just>supply a username.>>It might have been clearer if it was not just labled LAN, >which implies LOCAL area Network.... It's WAN as well !!Wow, you're absolutely right! That LAN title sure got me fooled as well :) I managed to dig up some server IPs and tried them out - they seem to work perfectly fine. So far 4 out of 4 succesful connections and what's more, both the voice comms AND text chat work just fine this way! (unlike if you connect through GameSpy, then block GameSpy's servers - at which point you lose text chat)Thanks for sharing this bit of information! I hope SP2 will re-label the "LAN" title to something else.

Your completely right. Heres a huge list of problems that happen to me using game spy.1. Whenever I try to sign in it will sign in than give me a message saying somebody else is signed on with my account. It takes between 1-12 tries before it sign me in.2. Before and after i join a server and even during loading i wil get a message saying i have been disconnected from game spy. 3. whenever i try to leave a server the game freezes.4. When i host a server my friend cant see it.5. Is it just me or does it take skill to scroll down the list of servers. It literally has seizures. It wont stay in one spot for more than 2 seconds. I can scroll halfway down the list and it will just pop right back to the top.