i try to play multiplayer but so far i can't, when i wanted to play against bladeswords on unreal tournament 2004 i can't seem to join in his servers. or any of my other buddies.

samuraiwarrior41 wrote: i try to play multiplayer but so far i can't, when i wanted to play against bladeswords on unreal tournament 2004 i can't seem to join in his servers. or any of my other buddies.

Make sure your firewall is set to allow that game. I had to tell ZoneAlarm to allow it when I first tried multi on UT2K4 in order to even see any games in the lobbies.

The multiplayer everyone is referring to is the old "Challenge Lobby" that GT had for many of its 2-player arcade games like Street Fighter Alpha 3, Metal Slug or Neo Turf Masters.

oh in that case man i so want that back so i can beat bladeswords on street fighter or team up with him in final fight it would awsome if we can play vs 3 people samuraiwarrior41 vs bladeswords vs buddha that would be cool. or maybe the team 4 would be awsome example in captain commando
samuraiwarrior41 will play captain commando
bladeswords will play mummy commando
buddha will play ninja commando
GAAAA will play baby commando
now that lololo will be awsome man lololo

Deathknight928 wrote: [Now if gametap had a server we could play FPS or strategy games on I would be all over it. As it is, it's really hard to coordinate with people well enough to get a MP game going with other Gametappers.

You hit the nail on the head Deathknight! One of the reasons Xbox Live is so successful is because of how easy they make the multiplayer matchup and communication process. You also bring up some additional hurdles GT is going to have with the browser based UI if they really want to pursue providing a multiplayer gaming experience. Audio input device management would be maddening from the browser; something that would have been much easier (though not easy) to tackle with a runtime/desktop client. Also, realtime friend status/msg/chat notifications. Those could be tackled with AJAX, but eventual page refreshes would kill the experience. I hope we don't see iframes . I'm sure they'll find a work around, assuming they've thought of the problem.

I was a paid subscriber in the days of the old stand-alone player.
I am not a paid subscriber anymore and I rarely visit the site now, so I don't see a lot of ads either.
The change disappointed me when it happened, but I remember thinking that I was probably just being grumpy and the new interface would turn out to be just fine. All this time later, I still miss and prefer the old player.
To my mind, Gametap went backwards with the change and has not yet recovered. It's a shame, because I used to be a big supporter and evangelist for the service.

brokenidol wrote: Deathknight928 wrote: [Now if gametap had a server we could play FPS or strategy games on I would be all over it. As it is, it's really hard to coordinate with people well enough to get a MP game going with other Gametappers. You hit the nail on the head Deathknight! One of the reasons Xbox Live is so successful is because of how easy they make the multiplayer matchup and communication process. You also bring up some additional hurdles GT is going to have with the browser based UI if they really want to pursue providing a multiplayer gaming experience. Audio input device management would be maddening from the browser; something that would have been much easier (though not easy) to tackle with a runtime/desktop client. Also, realtime friend status/msg/chat notifications. Those could be tackled with AJAX, but eventual page refreshes would kill the experience. I hope we don't see iframes . I'm sure they'll find a work around, assuming they've thought of the problem.

I really don't think Gametap having there own servers like that is going to happen. They cant very well go back and reprogram games to add in Gametap multiplayer. I imagine it might be possible for them to do something like Hamachi, but I very much doubt that it would be worth the very large sums of money it would take to create something like that. The amount of new subscribers that would bring in will probably not make them back the cost. Then again, im no expert. I could be totally wrong about all this.

We'll we did have an Unreal Multiplayer Tournament a while back. A great while back actually...I quess until they are finished re-encrypting to games we woon't be seeing anymore.

yeah i'm going to have to go with the majority on this, i had gametap a couple of years ago when you still had the player, and was impressed on all the games that could be played on a intuitive program that feels more akin to being an upgrade from this horrid browser based crap. To be honest, i'm really not sure how my longer i'll be subscribing. Imagine the slap in the face i felt when i found out that i can't play 90% of the games i want to play because i paid money for a decent 64-bit machine. Then on top of that, it takes forever to download a game, and 64-bit titles i should have no problem running won't always work. i could use this money to buy a budget title every month, at least it will work.

redefeat wrote: yeah i'm going to have to go with the majority on this, i had gametap a couple of years ago when you still had the player, and was impressed on all the games that could be played on a intuitive program that feels more akin to being an upgrade from this horrid browser based crap. To be honest, i'm really not sure how my longer i'll be subscribing. Imagine the slap in the face i felt when i found out that i can't play 90% of the games i want to play because i paid money for a decent 64-bit machine. Then on top of that, it takes forever to download a game, and 64-bit titles i should have no problem running won't always work. i could use this money to buy a budget title every month, at least it will work.

I was a paid member for two years, but I let my membership lapse last fall because the browser based system isn't anywhere near as good as the old player. I know that the old player will never return and Gametap really didn't have much choice in the matter. But it just doesn't work as well as it did before. I don't care what the supporters say.

And the $60 per year I'm not spending here is going to sale priced games. I bought a ton of stuff during the D2D $5 sale. And GOG gets money from me also. These games all work with minimal effort. Not like the last few months of my paid membership.

I'm open to come back, and even willing to pay the going rate of $80/year. But I would have to see some major improvements before I come back.

ok, to be honest i really liked the old cleint and the idea for this is great but as some people have said theres still "kinks". (i see them as big gaping holes) they should switch it back for now have a beta test and let them deal with the kinks while people with platinum memberships they just got a year for enjoy a "working service".

Also i give alot of points to these people trying to keep the site together but its hard with a bunch of unpatient ***holes complaining and if anybody from gametap is reading this get out there and tell the people what is going on why you need money so you cant get this moving agian. i mean cmon geet your act together.

i apologize if anyone who works the finds this mean or offensive.

quick note uh i think its my browser but when i try to download a game all it says there is loading and when i go to my downloading page its blank nothing at all thats another thing i have to say about this new site

i just don't know why this forum existed look if you guys hate gametap this much then do us all a favor and just leave.

samuraiwarrior41 wrote: i just don't know why this forum existed look if you guys hate gametap this much then do us all a favor and just leave.

You're right, if it's that bad the user should leave. That said, it's important to have a place to allow people to voice why they're leaving and what could have been done to prevent it. Granted, it's not going to change a thing, but at least unsatisfied customers feel like they're being heard. The odd twist on this forum is that unsatisfied customers are in the appropriate place for their comments whereas fan boys and girls act as "happy" trolls. I'm not saying you're a troll, but people that love GameTap seemingly come here to attack people that hate it. Don't hate the playa, hate the game!

brokenidol wrote: samuraiwarrior41 wrote: i just don't know why this forum existed look if you guys hate gametap this much then do us all a favor and just leave. You're right, if it's that bad the user should leave. That said, it's important to have a place to allow people to voice why they're leaving and what could have been done to prevent it. Granted, it's not going to change a thing, but at least unsatisfied customers feel like they're being heard. The odd twist on this forum is that unsatisfied customers are in the appropriate place for their comments whereas fan boys and girls act as "happy" trolls. I'm not saying you're a troll, but people that love GameTap seemingly come here to attack people that hate it. Don't hate the playa, hate the game!

..this!

Seconded...

I was a premium (or premiere, platinum, whatever...) subscriber to Gametap right before the switch over from the original client to the web-based GUI. I initially cancelled my membership due to money concerns, but was planning on returning once some extra cash freed up. By the time I was ready to do that, the client was discontinued and the web GUI was in full effect. I figured I better have a look at the new interface before I signed up again for an entire year.

At the time, the web GUI was absolute trash. Every game I tried in the free offerings either stalled during download, wouldn't launch, crashed/froze, or performed terribly. My "experiments" were conducted on three very clean machines with different hardware, operating systems, etc. I could've overlooked these growing pains if it was just the Windows titles. The arcade/console classics were what I was really after. They all seemed to download fine, but performance was absolutely attrocious. I mean, when Pac-man and Galaga have choppy framerates and frame-skipping on a Core2Quad with 4GB of RAM and an 8800GTS, there is definitely a problem. The fact that the games could not be played full-screen anymore, plus the removal of two-player keyboard mappings (I use an X-Arcade joystick) killed any possible interest I had in renewing my subscription.

Fast forward to a few nights ago and I decided on a whim to give Gametap another try. I was shocked to see that the "Free" option had vanished completely, but the $4.95 / month "classics" subscription seemed almost as good. I re-signed up on a month-to-month basis to check things out. I'm happy to say that most of the problems with the web based GUI have been resolved. For me, all the classic console/arcade games download fine... faster than I remember them coming down in the client actually. Having the full-screen option back is terrific, but I still miss being able to map two players to the keyboard (for the aforementioned X-Arcade joystick). Hopefully that feature will return as well. I'm glad to see that pretty much all of the games in my subscription run on 64-bit Windows 7 too.

It seems that Gametap has really made some strides with the Web GUI over the last year or so and for that, I really don't need to have the client player back. Now if they'd just put 2-player keyboard mappings back in they'll probably have a customer again for a long, long time. Some "new" additions to the classic arcade/console titles wouldn't hurt either

Bringing back the Challenge Lobby wouldn't hurt either!

any news on the Challenge Lobby yet?

Haven't heard anything about it in quite a while now. My guess is they're too busy trying to get the tray client up and running right now. I think most people are more psyched about that than the CL at this point anyway.

My only wishful thinking for GameTap is full Mac support but I know getting Windows games to run in Mac short of reprogramming is not so easy (Wine isn't even perfect). But the lack of 64-bit support especially after a major OS release (Win7) is inexcusable.

Web based games have never run that great in my experience. And so far, all this Metaboli nonsense seems to be GameTap's downfall. Perhaps you should start looking elsewhere for emulators. gog is running dosbox for a good number of their games and out of all of em I've only had one game crash, and the problem was gone when I restarted the game. It seems someone knows how to work this type of system.

The player wasn't perfect either but I was actually impressed with the emulation. Navigation was a breeze and customization (while limited) was nice. It was a far cry from this crap fest of web browsing nonsense. Half the games work terribly for me. Further, I've noticed that some titles are inferior versions no doubt used to save on stream time (King's Quest V, Space Quest V has NO VOICE, minor I guess but I think the voice overs really brought something to the game). If I were in the old player where I could download the game, the size wouldn't be as much of an issue.

Long story short, this new interface is horrible. The Player was perfectly fine (barring some easily fixable bugs - XBox wireless controller support please?). Last I checked my money paid for a desire service. This isn't what I paid for.

I finally got my mame cab complete and I was ready to pay $50+/year to GameTap and now I find out that they axed their totally awesome client fontend?!?!
Browers are free and so should be this service. This is a disgrace if you expect people to pay for this. Maybe you should port iPhone apps cuz obvisously you're not interested in loyal PC gamers any longer.

RIP Gametap

Bye.

D1rtyyyy wrote: I finally got my mame cab complete and I was ready to pay $50+/year to GameTap and now I find out that they axed their totally awesome client fontend?!?! Browers are free and so should be this service. This is a disgrace if you expect people to pay for this. Maybe you should port iPhone apps cuz obvisously you're not interested in loyal PC gamers any longer. RIP Gametap Bye.

Honestly putting a service like this in the middle of the browser wars isn't the best idea. It is utterly the idea of some corporate penny pinching lazy executive.

Diregnoll wrote: Honestly putting a service like this in the middle of the browser wars isn't the best idea. It is utterly the idea of some corporate penny pinching lazy executive.

The only penny-pinching that may have occurred was in not acquiring the old GT player rights from Turner, but we aren't privy to whether Turner would have even sold the rights; Metaboli also wanted the web interface since it was their preexisting format before they acquired Gametap, so they weren't interested in retaining the old player anyway. Also, I don't see how laziness factors into anything.

You all like to romantisize the old player but I had just as many if not more problems. Gametap player stopped responding. Games not playing. Downloads just stopped etc etc. Searching games was bad since you could see like 8 at time. LOL. Atleast now I can see couple games at once.

Personally in reality I dont think there is much diff. Understand how it works. The player is a FRONT END, the webplayer is a FRONT END, the backends did change however the player is not the be all to how gametap works. If anything the backend needs work (servers) and the player needs some fixes to get around the win7 and vista security issues.
to anyone that knows pcs this is same as blaiming your video cards drivers for a direct x issue. Its nothing to do with it.

Also alot confuse these two as being gametap

The game being buggy (how many games work as said?)
The os causing problems (UAC, firewall admin)

Then the end user - just make it work. They have those they are called consoles. LOL.

I never had any of those problems. And the search in the Gametap Standalone Player was SIGNIFICANTLY better than the "search" we have now. In the standalone player, it used a different algorithm which was far more likely to actually find the game you wanted without having to know its exact name.

Never mind the fact that a stand-alone player doesn't have to worry itself with a COMPLETELY UNRELATED set of software, like the always evolving browser wars.