> {quote:title=MarcusMang wrote:}{quote}
> I think we all just need to relax, give it a try before condemning Metaboli to the digital cross.

While true, I've been feeling a little frustrated. News like this seems to always show up when I come back from a break.

> {quote:title=LittlestCthulhu wrote:}{quote}
> Confirmed, the new silent player is all GameTap.
>
> EowynCarter, this really is a mix of the two. The player and the games are still GameTap, the new website definitely looks similar to Metaboli and we'll be getting a great download store from them, and some new licenses for subscribers.
>
>

Well, I always though gametap a better service than metaboli. And hopped metaboli would take from gametap, not the other way around.
Gametap changes, but metaboli don't improve.

And well, as us non - US peaple are not wellcomed here, and will never be anymore, well, i don't really care about gametap now.

By the way : the "change plan" page still display the mystonline plan to us. That needs a fix !
The links to paiement and plan management shoudn't show.

> {quote:title=Dachannien wrote:}{quote}
> > {quote:title=PenquinDude wrote:}{quote}
> > And IE and FireFox have had exploitable security issues, and XP and Vista and OSX have had exploitable security issues. Any complex software will have potential holes. GameTap subscribers isn't a very large demographic for anyone looking to exploit for gain, and the average PC gamer needs to be more computer savvy than the average computer user, also making them less lucrative targets.
>
> I can manage the security issues involving Firefox because I use NoScript to disable Javascript on nearly every website I visit. Most of XP's open issues are solved by not using IE or by using a software firewall and a NAT router. The point here is that a browser plugin can potentially be invoked by any website I visit, even despite my other precautions. Without having (a) some idea how the plugin is invoked so that I can block it myself, or (b) some guarantee that steps are being taken to prevent a third party website from invoking the plugin, it's a security risk I'm unwilling to install on my machine. And the fact that there's already a perfectly good standalone app that doesn't suffer from these security issues, and it's being abandoned because Metaboli drank the do-everything-in-the-browser-just-like-Google kool aid, is that much more disappointing.
Have you ever considered that you're overly paranoid about your computer? On my laptop, I've ran XP SP2 with automatic updates turned off and only sporadically manually updating, FireFox with only AdBlock and AVG Free and have gotten a grand total of one virus that was immediately detected and deleted when I(Stupidly) ran an .exe my friend gave me on a flash drive without scanning it first.

> {quote:title=freyarh wrote:}{quote}
> While true, I've been feeling a little frustrated. News like this seems to always show up when I come back from a break.

Well, the obvious fix for this is just to never take a break. ;)

> {quote:title=PenquinDude wrote:}{quote}

> Have you ever considered that you're overly paranoid about your computer? On my laptop, I've ran XP SP2 with automatic updates turned off and only sporadically manually updating, FireFox with only AdBlock and AVG Free and have gotten a grand total of one virus that was immediately detected and deleted when I(Stupidly) ran an .exe my friend gave me on a flash drive without scanning it first.

I don't think its fair to criticize soneone else's security concerns. Security holes are security holes, and with a large enough population of users there are bound to be security minded people concerned with any holes they find, regardless of the probability fo their machine being compromised.

Security minded people would also be concernedwhen a change is made from potentially more secure (and working) interface to one that is less secure.

Questions for those who worked on the new interface: Was it tested with young kids? Say as young as 3 to 5 year olds? Were they able to easily navigate the new interface? Are the parent controls so that the kids didn't even see games that weren't approprate? So far it looks like zero consideration has been given to the new interface to usability. You can not even customize controls. Now I can set it up to be controlled all with a 360 game pad.

I will at least try the new interface but I think the changes of me unsubscribing is pretty high. If I wanted to have my kids play a broken flash site, there are pleanty of sites on the web that do that for free.

> {quote:title=gametap blog wrote:}{quote}
> -Improved parental controls
just thought id mention it.

> {quote:title=PenquinDude wrote:}{quote}
> Have you ever considered that you're overly paranoid about your computer? On my laptop, I've ran XP SP2 with automatic updates turned off and only sporadically manually updating, FireFox with only AdBlock and AVG Free and have gotten a grand total of one virus that was immediately detected and deleted when I(Stupidly) ran an .exe my friend gave me on a flash drive without scanning it first.
virus are not the only security risk theres information theft,zombie-ising of your pc and many others.

It's nice you want to determine everyone's comfort level with security for them Penguin, but I think it's pretty clear internet plugins have not been trustworthy allies on the web.

It is sad we are devolving into a flash game kind of site, baron_calamity. I'm on the fence right now, almost halfway through my membership. I have gotten gt paying subscribers through word of mouth (no referral credits on this site for some reason), but it is fair to say I won't be doing that anymore. It's the type of run business where no one would be surprised if they went under in 6 months. Usually when you no longer offer features and steadily raise the price, you become a regression run business. It isn't customer centric at all. Enjoy the final act, I see this move as the final mistake of a business that had potential.

> {quote:title=mmmyeahright wrote:}{quote}
>Usually when you no longer offer features
Most of which are coming back..

>and steadily raise the price

"Steadily"? I think this is the first price +increase+ in GameTap's history. Their prices at launch were significantly higher than they are at present.

Actually I'm surprised that they haven't done this sooner. Most people I've talked to when I tell them the price think its an [b]insane[/b] deal of the sort that wouldn't hold up forever. I haven't seen a single reply yet saying the new annual price is too high. It is also worth noting that [b]many[/b] titles have been added to the service since the $59.95 price was put in place, so it makes sense to raise the price. More titles = more licensing fees = higher cost.

Also most of the time when a business is about to go under, I usually see them lowering the price like mad in order to pull in ANY sort of additional revenue. It's sort of a triage in order to salvage whatever business is left. The fact that GameTap is raising the annual rate I think shows confidence in the new strategy going forward.

It's also worth noting that the monthly rate isn't going up at all.

> {quote:title=macnbc wrote:}{quote}
> > {quote:title=mmmyeahright wrote:}{quote}
> >Usually when you no longer offer features
> Most of which are coming back..

Which ones aren't? And you know as well as I do how long it took to fix back in The Best Update Ever campaign.

As an edit to your last point, the price hike looks like a metaboli model move, not a statement on profitability.

> {quote:title=jac1002 wrote:}{quote}
> > {quote:title=gametap blog wrote:}{quote}
> > -Improved parental controls
> just thought id mention it.

I honestly spit on that, control your kids or don't, I'm not giving up leaderboards/challenge play for it willingly...

Codeguru

> {quote:title=Codeguru wrote:}{quote}
> > {quote:title=jac1002 wrote:}{quote}
> > > {quote:title=gametap blog wrote:}{quote}
> > > -Improved parental controls
> > just thought id mention it.
>
> I honestly spit on that, control your kids or don't, I'm not giving up leaderboards/challenge play for it willingly...
>
> Codeguru
i said that because i somehow read that baron said it looks like zero consideration has been given to parent controls.(and looking at it again he did not.it seems my eyes doth betray me. well i'll keep a close ear on them from now on)

and i dont think they have any thing to do with the leaderboards.

Is there a change in profits to move to have developed and run a web flash-esque model of dealing with downloads and management?

The problem is, by forcing everything to the browser the perceived value drops tremendously. Gamers don't like white-space, and unfortunately the new layout seems to provide plenty of it.

> {quote:title=freyarh wrote:}{quote}
> The problem is, by forcing everything to the browser the perceived value drops tremendously. Gamers don't like white-space, and unfortunately the new layout seems to provide plenty of it.

So true. Notice how youtube has a dimmer switch now? That's nice.

Alright it's time I posted my thoughts here, after much thought.

Here's what my wife and I thought when Gametap and Metaboli announced their partnership or whatever you want to call it:

Metaboli/Gametap will use Gametap player, but add all those sweet sweet new games Metaboli offers as well. Because Gametap player, although more memory consuming is an all-in-one solution and place for you to get your gaming fix, quickly, simply, and search friendly. Metaboli player is, well, just this little icon that sits in your tray and manages your downloads, while you try to scour the website and maybe find something if you can figure out where anything is.

[b]BUZZ[/b]

Wrong answer!

Reality of the story:

Gametap will use what is coded by Gametap, but look incredibly like Metaboli. I'm sorry, but Metaboli has horrible web interface, I seriously hope they consider maybe letting people still use the Gametap player? I mean, what about those people who want to use Gametap in conjunction with Windows Media Center + Xbox 360 controller? The way the new Gametap looks makes for a funkified interface and quite frankly gets rid of a selling point, why would any business want to do that?

Gametap took years to develop their shiny interface with now excellent search, wonderful layout and ironing out bugs along the way, why throw it away completely now for a web interface? I feel sorry for the person who came up with the original concept to see it's complete demise.

Basically: GIVE PEOPLE CHOICES! It's the absolute BEST business model you can offer! If I want to use a separate player and be able to use it with a Media Center, I should be able to. If I want a quick fix and just go to the web for a quick Genesis game, I should be able to. (Ok ok, you gave us choices on the pricing, now where's the actual usability choice?)

Oh wait, Gametap does that now, but you're taking all of that away? Great! Thanks! Lets just load up another tab in Firefox and get distracted and end up somehow on Facebook or checking my e-mail. Yeah, that makes me use Gametap more.

Also, I read somewhere that the fact that Fable is now on Gametap has nothing to do with the merger, say what? I thought that was part of the deal, get some more games to GAMEtap?

Bottom line, as far as I go: When I game, I want to GAME, not surf the web. I don't need another browser window open, I don't want to install another plugin or addon, I don't want to see white space as someone else mentioned. I, just, want, to play a GAME.

Common Gametap, you better start reassuring us customers that it will be, in fact, better or it looks like a lot of customers will be lost on this one. More features does not = better!!! So just stop all the whole secret society thing, give us a COMPLETE run down with what's going to change with more complete screenshots and make us feel comfortable with forking over our hard earned cash again and again, month after month (or yearly).

I don't care if you change, just reassure us a little better that your changes will be for the better, or at the very least make us believe they will be, because, based on the posts on this forum, there doesn't seem to be very many buyers.

Here's my dream for your guys' next blog post headline: "By popular demand, Gametap player stays! Users will still have a choice between the web player or the Gametap player."

Ok, I'm done, sorry, been holding that in and pondering on it.

> {quote:title=ddthesm wrote:}{quote}
>I mean, what about those people who want to use Gametap in conjunction with Windows Media Center + Xbox 360 controller? The way the new Gametap looks makes for a funkified interface and quite frankly gets rid of a selling point, why would any business want to do that?

This could be a reason why there was a poll recently asking everyone's favorite controller. I really can't play games like asteroids, bosconian, tapper, etc. on a keyboard. The 360 controller is nice, but custom controls are going to be "temporarily" removed? (Is that right?)

> Basically: GIVE PEOPLE CHOICES! It's the absolute BEST business model you can offer! If I want to use a separate player and be able to use it with a Media Center, I should be able to. If I want a quick fix and just go to the web for a quick Genesis game, I should be able to. (Ok ok, you gave us choices on the pricing, now where's the actual usability choice?)

If you want choices, you can't really say "Those choices don't count."

> Oh wait, Gametap does that now, but you're taking all of that away? Great! Thanks! Lets just load up another tab in Firefox and get distracted and end up somehow on Facebook or checking my e-mail. Yeah, that makes me use Gametap more.

Gametap/Metaboli get paid either way. It's not their fault if you get distracted.

>More features does not = better!!!

There's less this time around.

> So just stop all the whole secret society thing, give us a COMPLETE run down with what's going to change with more complete screenshots and make us feel comfortable with forking over our hard earned cash again and again, month after month (or yearly).

They are doing that. They have been posting on the [url=http://gametapblog.com/]Gametap Blog[/url]. I feel bad for Cthulu, and the rest of the staff that the perceived (or at least mine) response is negative to the work they've no doubt been putting together, but it's one of those things I guess.

> I don't care if you change, just reassure us a little better that your changes will be for the better, or at the very least make us believe they will be, because, based on the posts on this forum, there doesn't seem to be very many buyers.
>
> Here's my dream for your guys' next blog post headline: "By popular demand, Gametap player stays! Users will now have a choice between the web player or the Gametap player."

They'd need to choose one or the other because managing updates and development for both is quite difficult and expensive. I'd like the GT player to stay too, but ultimately it's the higher-up's choice. After it goes live (I'm still trying to decide if I should re-activate my primary account again to lock in the old rate), I'll then be able to decide it. I'm disappointed that there has been no beta news or requests, since that means I won't be able to adequately judge what's coming up.

Like trailers and screenshots for games, the information provided seems.. 'tailored' to make it look more pretty than it is.

ddthesm, if getting to the games as quickly as possible is truly what you want, then the option to put shortcuts on your desktop or Start Menu should be a huge benefit. Our new site is +influenced+ by Metaboli's, not a copy, we have a search function that is much improved over the old client. We did get Fable as a result of our Metaboli partnership and there are even better titles coming, where did you read that it wasn't? I'm doing everything I can to make this transition transparent for you guys, please check out the [url=http://gametapblog.com]blog[/url] posts if you haven't already.

I've got to agree with the mod about the pricing. I remember paying $15 a month in Gametap's early days. It's now been $10 for quite a while. So the price is not actually going up all, it's the discount you receive for making a long-term commitment that's going down. But even at that you're saving $40 a year with the annual. And this price change only affects new people who get an annual sub after March 16th. We long-time Gametappers aren't being affected by these new prices at all.

And about the security concerns- at least wait and see before you worry. The company isn't stupid. I think they realize that a major security flaw could spell doom for the whole service, so you've got to believe they're putting plenty of time and resources into making sure they've got that part down. At least wait until you actually get a chance to see the update in action. It seems like a few people are expecting the worst-case-scenario here.

The Gametap/Metaboli folks are not a few youngsters running this thing from their parents' basement. They are business and tech professionals whose own livelihood is dependent on the success of their company. That's not to say they're immune to mistakes. Nobody is. But there's a reason they had the capital to purchase Gametap in the first place.

The truth is that there's really no way to know just how the new service will run until we're running it. And while I know there's a lot of disappointment about some features being unavailable at first, those features are coming back. And while it may have taken a long time in the past for the "coming soon" features to actually arrive, that was when Gametap was being run by Gametap. Gametap is now run by Metaboli. We can't assume things will be the same as they were before. I think we're already seeing proof (whether good or bad remains to be seen) that things will be quite different from here on out.

Agree with IAMMIKE. Even if GT offered nothing but Windows games, you're still getting a great deal, price increase or not. And they aren't being shady--you have two weeks to get in at the going rate FOR LIFE. Most companies, especially the shady ones, wouldn't offer that. And as someone just pointed out, monthly is still 9.95. So basically, 1 price increase and not even a huge one. In this economy, that is as much of a golden parachute as the consumer could ever hope to get.

TW/Turner are dying corporations. Be happy this happened. They were talking about scrapping GT altogether on the financial reports as I remember it (or at least the term "get rid of it" came up). If keeping GT means losing leaderboards and a few bells and whistles for a moment, so be it, at least its still here.

NOD is your friend, security minded folks. Worth the money, will help your concerns. Get a firewall, NOD (or ESET has a security pkg as well) and a couple of spyware killers and you are set. Free AVs are only ok, trust me, I was running AVAST with the last big worm outbreak and all it did was nothing. ZoneAlarm is a decent free firewall you could use, but do realize that free is not best as far as security solutions are concerned.

Good hackers can break through just about anything, I share your concerns, but it is easy to let concerns spiral into paranoia, I do it all the time. I am not a security expert..yet..but these basic steps will help most of your concerns.

Truth is, if you are that worried, you should either dedicate a machine to Internet activities or not go on at all. I hear Linux is much more secure than Windows or OS X, but I've never used it and I am sure it has its limitations.

Last thing--GT's old owners were terrible businessmen, CEOs that did not care about gaming. GT was just a way to get yet more money from people in their eyes and while they did allow the team to develop a good product, they obviously didn't care about the details. I am sure many delays were due to the "bottom line". I'm willing to bet the new ownership is going to care and will allow the GT Dev Team to do a lot more than the old ownership did.

At least give it a chance. 17 flaming pages of tears is overboard for this type of switch. Of course, no one is holding a gun to your head (or a match to your yams) forcing you to accept it, though I think canceling over the older console games going browser is a bit knee jerk of a reaction. Just my opinion though...

So from what I gather far too much is being taken away.

1- We already don't have GTTV anymore (which I loved).

2-We're not going to have full screen at launch. (are you serious? don't launch it till it's ready, don't put out a half assed program that loses members instead of brings them in).
3-No leaderboards at the start. (see above).
4-No more client? Some people actually like the client, how about giving us an option?
5-No customizable controls at first? (seriously? see 2).

While you have stated some benefits these are game breaking negatives. If it were me ( and i know it's not I'm simply stating this) I wouldn't release the thing until all the features you currently have are ready for launch. Downgrading what you have, even for a little while can be detrimental. You have to understand that any time a company says (we will bring the features back sometimes in the future) that it places a HUGE shadow of doubt over the customers head, and we start to wonder (are they really going to do it or not?) That goes for all developers, not just gametap.

I'm not trying to sound harsh here, just shedding some honest light on the subject. Taking away features will LOSE you customers. Even if you only take them away for a little while, and that's a proven fact.

In regards to the questions about security, I talked with devs about it, they feel that the security of the new player is on par with the old player. The GameTap Plug-In is running in its own process, does not elevate privileges for the browser, and the player and ActiveX plugin are signed with digital security certificates. If you are a hardcore security purist and feel that ActiveX controls are inherently insecure, there isn't much I can do to comfort you, it is what it is.

> {quote:title=Zorlac666 wrote:}{quote}
> I'm not trying to sound harsh here, just shedding some honest light on the subject. Taking away features will LOSE you customers. Even if you only take them away for a little while, and that's a proven fact.

It's also a proven fact that [b]any[/b] sort of change is going to lose a company customers in the short-term. It doesn't matter how awesome the changes are, the cold truth is that some people aren't going to like them and will leave as a result.

For example, take a local restaurant. It's had the same menu and decor for the last 10 years. They decide they want to update themselves. So they revamp the menu, update the decor, get a new logo, the whole kit'n'kaboodle. They might get hundreds of new customers who love it and decide its their new favorite restaurant, but some of the old regulars might get alienated by the changes and leave.

I think GameTap knows this and has a projected attrition rate (just as they probably did for 3.5, 3.0, 1.8, and so on..). They probably also believe, however, that the long-term gains will outweigh the short-term losses. Risk vs. reward and so forth.

I think its easy to look at people posting to this thread or blog entry comments and try to guess at how popular/unpopular an update is, but one also must consider that the opinions posted to these sorts of things tend to fall at one extreme or the other. To go back to the restaurant analogy, you're most likely to see reviews on Yelp for restaurants that people thought were +amazing+, or were +awful+, but not people who just thought it was "Good", or "Kinda OK", and those people make up the majority most of the time.

I'm not saying the update is unpopular, I'm not saying it won't be for the better. I'm just saying why not finish it with the features that we already have rather than release it in what is essentially a Beta form?

> {quote:title=LittlestCthulhu wrote:}{quote}
> In regards to the questions about security, I talked with devs about it, they feel that the security of the new player is on par with the old player. The GameTap Plug-In is running in its own process, does not elevate privileges for the browser, and the player and ActiveX plugin are signed with digital security certificates. If you are a hardcore security purist and feel that ActiveX controls are inherently insecure, there isn't much I can do to comfort you, it is what it is.

Thanks for looking into it. I'm sure the gametap plug in is secure but changing a browser's permissions to allow any activex run is a dangerious thing. I can imagine my 5 year old daughter, trying to get to one of the Jump Start games, clicking on an ad, getting lost, clicking yes on every popup and the next thing I know I have an infected computer and she just learned a whole bunch of adult human activites. Its one of the reasons why I liked gametap. Under Vista, they click on their name, everything is locked down, no desktop icons, the task bar is even hidden and the gametap client autostarts at log in and logs in for them. Each kid has their own play list and except for the Windows log on screen, they never have to touch the mouse if they don't have too for the game.

Does my wife and I keep an eye on the kids online? Sure but it was great to know they could operate the computer without Mommy or Daddy doing everything for them. Plus the kids got a kick out of being independant in terms of selecting and starting a game.

So, I've been thinking about this move to the web client... Since the browser is just going to be a container for the plugin, AND you are going to have a FireFox plugin, AND FireFox is opensource, is there any reason (short of my own programming limitations) that I could not write my own client that launched games by pretending to be FireFox?

It seems to me that while you support the web page, there is no reason that the OSS community could not write their own clients. Of course, if you would supply some kind of api to your web site, this would simplify the process dramatically. Heck, given how much many people REALLY like the GameTap Player (myself included), perhaps you should be talking to the XBMC guys.

In a perfect world, the way I would see it going is like this:

*You make your web based service.

*You allow specific HTML calls to return XML data. i.e. 'http://www.gametap.com/api/search=persia' returns an xml document that has title, description, urls to screen shots, and a url to launch the game.

*You publish the specs on this very simple interface and let the XBMC folks know it exists.

*You then continue to run your service as you have planned, and having the api functioning being your only 'GameTap Player' support you are concerned about.

*The XBMC folks decide that GameTap is an awsome way to replace the one piece of functionality that the Windows version of XBMC is missing from the Xbox version.

By doing this, you could increase your advertising almost for free,. All of us that want a dedicated player could get one that is pretty mature with no further development on your part. You would by default be supporting as many players as there are people that want to write them. You would expand your service from being tied to a little screen on a desk, to also being a console system for the more technically inclined crowd.

If you don't supply an api, it is likely that screen scrappers will be used anyway to make a new player without you, but you would both garner good, make your service appear more reliable, as well as reduce load on your servers if you give us an api.

Thoughts?