brokenidol wrote: You leave me no choice gametap. It's December and I'm still stuck in a browser based UI.

Were you waiting for the GT client to come back? The browser-based system is what Gametap changed to when they were taken over by Metaboli. Metaboli wanted GT to be like their own preexisting interface. There aren't and there never were any plans to bring back the stand-alone client and that fact has been stated repeatedly since the switch. You can wait til December of next year and GT will still be using the browser-based UI. You're free to complain all you want, but the fact is the old player isn't coming back.

buddha420 wrote: brokenidol wrote: You leave me no choice gametap. It's December and I'm still stuck in a browser based UI. Were you waiting for the GT client to come back? The browser-based system is what Gametap changed to when they were taken over by Metaboli. Metaboli wanted GT to be like their own preexisting interface. There aren't and there never were any plans to bring back the stand-alone client and that fact has been stated repeatedly since the switch. You can wait til December of next year and GT will still be using the browser-based UI. You're free to complain all you want, but the fact is the old player isn't coming back.

he has a point you know brokenidol you should listen before you complain.

buddha420 wrote: brokenidol wrote: You leave me no choice gametap. It's December and I'm still stuck in a browser based UI. Were you waiting for the GT client to come back? The browser-based system is what Gametap changed to when they were taken over by Metaboli. Metaboli wanted GT to be like their own preexisting interface. There aren't and there never were any plans to bring back the stand-alone client and that fact has been stated repeatedly since the switch. You can wait til December of next year and GT will still be using the browser-based UI. You're free to complain all you want, but the fact is the old player isn't coming back.

Don't forget the System Tray Icon comming though. Date: TBD!

buddha420 wrote: brokenidol wrote: You leave me no choice gametap. It's December and I'm still stuck in a browser based UI. Were you waiting for the GT client to come back? The browser-based system is what Gametap changed to when they were taken over by Metaboli. Metaboli wanted GT to be like their own preexisting interface. There aren't and there never were any plans to bring back the stand-alone client and that fact has been stated repeatedly since the switch. You can wait til December of next year and GT will still be using the browser-based UI. You're free to complain all you want, but the fact is the old player isn't coming back.

I find your complaint about my complaint slightly absurd, but I'll indulge. To answer your question, no, I wasn't expecting them to go back to a stand-alone client. I had hoped GT would at least acknowledge and innovate, but perhaps that was asking too much. I decided that unlike you, I wouldn't acquiesce to a mediocre gaming experience, which is why I cancelled my account. Like you said, Metaboli wanted GT to be like their pre-existing system, but obviously failed to research the problems that the GT stand-alone client resolved. A stand-alone client can leverage UI controls that the browser can't (natively). It can bypass the security issues browsers deal with regularly. It can optimally and efficiently scale to your system resources. It can deliver the same dynamic content, but render the views much faster. All of that said, I'm not entirely against a browser-based UI, but they need to do it using a proven runtime environment. My complaint is valid, and I dare you to prove otherwise. The native browser is not the optimal client for what Metaboli is attempting to accomplish. Give me some rational customer related reasons why a browser is superior to a stand-alone client or a runtime. I see why they would do it from a selfish business standpoint, but in the long run that will hurt their business. Ultimately, my point of contention is that they're using the native browser as the UI for what is ultimately a gaming UX.

samuraiwarrior41 wrote: buddha420 wrote: brokenidol wrote: You leave me no choice gametap. It's December and I'm still stuck in a browser based UI. Were you waiting for the GT client to come back? The browser-based system is what Gametap changed to when they were taken over by Metaboli. Metaboli wanted GT to be like their own preexisting interface. There aren't and there never were any plans to bring back the stand-alone client and that fact has been stated repeatedly since the switch. You can wait til December of next year and GT will still be using the browser-based UI. You're free to complain all you want, but the fact is the old player isn't coming back. he has a point you know brokenidol you should listen before you complain.

Oh no, the fanboys are on the loose! Instead of restating all of the specific reasons a stand-alone client or runtime would offer an exponentially better UX than the native browser, I'll let your read my response to buddha420. I look forward to your necessary and insightful one liner once you've finished. Cheers

tsrblke2 wrote: buddha420 wrote: brokenidol wrote: You leave me no choice gametap. It's December and I'm still stuck in a browser based UI. Were you waiting for the GT client to come back? The browser-based system is what Gametap changed to when they were taken over by Metaboli. Metaboli wanted GT to be like their own preexisting interface. There aren't and there never were any plans to bring back the stand-alone client and that fact has been stated repeatedly since the switch. You can wait til December of next year and GT will still be using the browser-based UI. You're free to complain all you want, but the fact is the old player isn't coming back. Don't forget the System Tray Icon comming though. Date: TBD!

This may be a step in the right direction, but based on what I've seen, I doubt it. In spite of the hype coming from GT, which seems to be trickle down from the people who thought up the idea, it's really just going to be a connection point into an already poor web-based UX. Sure, they're adding download management in the system tray, but that's minimal compared to what's been lost IMHO. Either way, you make a valid point, and I hope for your sake that it's a positive addition.

brokenidol wrote: I find your complaint about my complaint slightly absurd, but I'll indulge.

It wasn't a complaint about your complaint, it was merely pointing out the fact that the stand-alone client is not returning in any form. From your initial post it seemed like you were waiting for the client to return. The browser UI is the way Metaboli wants it and that's the way it is. It's not a matter of whether it's better or worse than the old client. Everyone agrees the old client was superior. No one is arguing that point. But it's not coming back.

brokenidol wrote: I decided that unlike you, I wouldn't acquiesce to a mediocre gaming experience, which is why I cancelled my account.

Thanks for that personal dig. Again, I'm not arguing your point that the old client was better. The browser system works for me and it's more than I need. I guess in your opinion my gaming experience is mediocre. I'm happy with what I have. You aren't. So go somewhere else and find yourself a superior gaming experience. There's no point in telling Gametap they need to go back to the way things were or build a new standalone client because it isn't going to happen.

buddha420 wrote: The browser UI is the way Metaboli wants it and that's the way it is. It's not a matter of whether it's better or worse than the old client. Everyone agrees the old client was superior. No one is arguing that point. But it's not coming back.

Because customers will sit there and take it. We hold the cards, we have the money and thus the power over those who make the decisions. Sadly, they will suffocate what could be a great product and pound it into the ground because no one does anything about it. Metaboli could develop a better product, but they won't, because the community slams guys like me that are trying to hold the company accountable with my consumer dollars. Money talks, and unless the community does something to force Metaboli to open their eyes, they will continue to do what they think is best; in spite of what the consumers demand. You're actually working against yourself by debating me instead of urging them to progress. It's not about them catering to me (I'm gone at the end of the month), it's about them looking at the needs of the constituency, and trying to meet those needs to the best of their ability. That's what I was trying to do, urge them to consider the path they're on. In spite of my best effort, their hard-headed motives will not be derailed, and the community will lose someone that was working for them. Sounds a lot like the American banking companies to me.

brokenidol wrote: I decided that unlike you, I wouldn't acquiesce to a mediocre gaming experience, which is why I cancelled my account.

buddha420 wrote: Thanks for that personal dig.

You're right, there was no need for me to target you on this remark. I apologize.

buddha420 wrote: There's no point in telling Gametap they need to go back to the way things were or build a new standalone client because it isn't going to happen.

I was speaking to the community, the people that are really in power. If I thought I alone could change Metaboli's mind, I would have invested my comments solely in private messages to them. I believe all you can do when you're fed up but don't want to leave, is speak out and try to implore those in charge (the community) to adjust their path (capitulation). I think GT could have grown into something great. Mobile integration for classics, a set-top console, SDK for indie development, and much much more. It really could've been something...but I don't see that happening under Metaboli; they're moving in the wrong direction. I'll check back now and again, but I'll likely go back to using Steam (http://www.steampowered.com) and the old ad hoc purchasing system.

Ahh Populism. Good fun. Horrible system for actually getting things done though. "It's us versus them! Fight them! Make them Conceed to us"
Of course the consumers hold the cards as far as money is concerned, but it's really not a critical mass, until it reaches a critical mass, and it's not getting there. I don't think it's ever getting there.
It's your's (and other's) choice if you want to stay or not. "Capitulation" is just as much a valid choice as walking away. (Although Capitulation implies negativity, which isn't neccesiarily the case. If you want to make that argument, you'll need to shore it up with something else.) Companies change stuff all the time. Then consumers revalue and decide if they want the new product or not. If GT had kept the old client and doubled the price, we'd have the same complaints from different angles. That's not de facto "capitulation" (Again, Capitulation implies surrender, usually complete, rather than perhaps acceptance, which carries less negative connotations.)
In their business decision making, this is what dropped out. The business will either succeed or fail on this choice, but the idea that they have to change just because some members of the community demand it is ludicris. After all, what makes the path the community has chosen (that is embracing, and working with the changes, because to us it's still a good deal and decent enough for the money product) any worse than your path (Give up, withhold money and either wait for them to change or watch it burn.) It's your value/judgement system, that's what it is. And, barring discovery of a universial theory of justice and natural law, it may not be applicable to all of us.
This of course isn't to imply that GT made the most awesome decision ever, and that you shouldn't leave. (After all it's your judgment.) It's just making a point that telling us to change our ways isn't really that useful.

/End Philosophy rant

tsrblke2 wrote: Ahh Populism. Good fun. Horrible system for actually getting things done though.

It's a bad way to get things done on a consistent basis, but a very effective way to bring about change for a good cause.

tsrblke2 wrote: "It's us versus them! Fight them! Make them Conceed to us"

That's not it at all. It's assisting in better definition of roles. I believe it should be a cooperative process between company and constituent; but I firmly believe Metaboli has abandoned this process. That said, I really am amazed that within the community there seems to be more loyalty to the GT brand than to UX. Perhaps I really don't belong here anymore.

tsrblke2 wrote: Of course the consumers hold the cards as far as money is concerned, but it's really not a critical mass, until it reaches a critical mass, and it's not getting there. I don't think it's ever getting there.

Another reason why I probably don't belong in this community.

tsrblke2 wrote: The business will either succeed or fail on this choice, but the idea that they have to change just because some members of the community demand it is ludicris.

I don't think they should change it because some community members demand it, I think they should change it because there are very VERY strong technical and UX arguments that they're utilizing the wrong tool to get the job done. This leaves me to conclude that they have either employed bad consultation and are in too deep to reassess, they don't care, or the scariest option that they don't know.

tsrblke2 wrote: /End Philosophy rant

Implies you've resolved the philosophical conundrum, which you haven't. What you've done is proposed why capitulation or (insert alternate word here) is as valid as resignation. No one has even attempted to address how GT making a very bad choice for a very good product is beneficial for the customers. My contention is directly related to GT removing a solid UX in place of poor UX, and being completely ok with it. I respect everyone's decisions, and I'll close on that. Best of luck to all who remain loyal GT customers.

am i the only one who could careless what client they use. The one they have now works just fine for me, your suppose to be here for the games not the client. What i miss about the old gametap is that there was a 39 page thread of whining about the past

brokenidol wrote: This leaves me to conclude that they have either employed bad consultation and are in too deep to reassess, they don't care, or the scariest option that they don't know.

Or it implies that you don't know the entire reach of variables that went into this decision. It's been said before, when GT was bought out, Metaboli opted to go with their system because it's what they knew, and were familiar with. Also there was something incompatable between the two system's backends It's certianly not as good as the old system, but it's what Metaboli felt was the best option given their current setup. Frankly, I'm not sure we'd be seeing 64 bit compatabilty yet (among other things) if not for the chance to Metaboli's house system. I don't think this was a simple "let's get rid of the client..blah blah blah.." choice. I think it was more of a "we can't possibly maintain 2 infrastructures" choice. Why they chose the metaboli one of the GT one? That'd require knowledge we just aren't privvy too.

brokenidol wrote: tsrblke2 wrote: /End Philosophy rant Implies you've resolved the philosophical conundrum, which you haven't. What you've done is proposed why capitulation or (insert alternate word here) is as valid as resignation. No one has even attempted to address how GT making a very bad choice for a very good product is beneficial for the customers. My contention is directly related to GT removing a solid UX in place of poor UX, and being completely ok with it. I respect everyone's decisions, and I'll close on that. Best of luck to all who remain loyal GT customers.

Actually it implies that I got off on a rant of imposing your definitions of things like "value" and "cost" and "quality" on other people. Which has been brought up by numorous philosophers (i.e. whether there is a universal defintion of words like that.) Before I posted, I removed some of that but left the little tag at the end. If you care to read more I suggest H. Tristam Engelhardt's "Foundation of Bioethics" as a good negative project on covergant views.

alabama2561990 wrote: am i the only one who could careless what client they use. The one they have now works just fine for me, your suppose to be here for the games not the client. What i miss about the old gametap is that there was a 39 page thread of whining about the past

Not to worry, in time all of us will be gone.

brokenidol wrote: alabama2561990 wrote: Not to worry, in time all of us will be gone.

not everyone, i highly doubt your view is the majority's views

It looks like I've joined in a bad time.. I really do wish we had the old client back, it was much faster.. But I suppose I can deal with it.

On a side note, I'm picking up this vibe from the GT staff, the.. "Quit whining about the changes being made, give us your money or don't, we don't care."

Hell, the guy's avatar even boldly says it.

I don't feel right giving my money to a company that doesn't care.. You do care, right?

Er, tsrblke is a volunteer mod, and I'm pretty sure his avatar was a joke created by another forum member.

alabama2561990 wrote: not everyone, i highly doubt your view is the majority's views

I was referring to those who share my opinion. It's obvious not everyone will leave. I'll bet more share my opinion than you think, but I'm one of the few that would rather do without for a bit than continue to support a company I thoroughly disagree with. Currently there aren't a lot of solid alternatives to GT. Wait until they get some healthy competition, then you'll see how quick they can get a better UX together. Maybe then I'll jump back, but chances are I and a good chunck of GT customers will go to the alternative.

killarai wrote: It looks like I've joined in a bad time.. I really do wish we had the old client back, it was much faster.. But I suppose I can deal with it. On a side note, I'm picking up this vibe from the GT staff, the.. "Quit whining about the changes being made, give us your money or don't, we don't care." Hell, the guy's avatar even boldly says it. I don't feel right giving my money to a company that doesn't care.. You do care, right?

I firmly believe GT doesn't care about your or I as a customer, my cancellation reply is excellent proof of that; no attempt to discern why I was dissatisfied or how they could keep my business. The technical support was another example of how little they cared, but I'm sure others have had different experiences. The community has been rather contentious toward those who voice their disagreement with Metaboli's move to the browser based interface. But to be fair, tsrblke2 is a volunteer mod. I completely disagree with him on this topic, but he doesn't (to my knowledge) represent the company. The only way to change corporate minds is with consumer dollars. I have three dissatisfied friends that have also cancelled, and two buddies that were considering joining and asked my opinion; they're not signing up. It's sad, but true. I wish you the best and hope GT is better to you than they were to me.

----------- I'll check back now and again, but I'll likely go back to using Steam (http://www.steampowered.com) and the old ad hoc purchasing system.[/quote]

The way you feel about Gametap is how I feel about Steam except I bet I am a bit more angry at Steam than you are at GT. I've bought two or three games that force you to install Steam. That thing is buggy, eats up my resources, and I can't uninstall it. I probably would have bought Left for Dead 1+2 if it had not been on Steam.

There are problems have seen on GT. I just came back to GT after a long period gone. After I resigned up and tried to play the games, none of them would start. I was livid. There was no obvious place for the steps to resolve this problem which I understand is very common. After looking the forums I found some different things to try and one of them worked. A second problem is the multiplayer option seems to be gone. I would like to see two links on the http://support.gametap.com/selfservice/ page that are clearly related to both issues.

Now that I got the games running though I am more than satisfied with the 10 bucks I paid for this month. If nothing else I really wanted to play Tropico 3 big time, which is a brand new game.

buster42 wrote: Er, tsrblke is a volunteer mod, and I'm pretty sure his avatar was a joke created by another forum member.

True on both counts. After a bunch of users complained because I cleaned up the forums after the creation of this thread (through mergers and such) a user created this avatar for me as a joke, because apparently I was dubbed the "angry moderator"

adaradrian wrote: The way you feel about Gametap is how I feel about Steam except I bet I am a bit more angry at Steam than you are at GT. I've bought two or three games that force you to install Steam. That thing is buggy, eats up my resources, and I can't uninstall it. I probably would have bought Left for Dead 1+2 if it had not been on Steam...Now that I got the games running though I am more than satisfied with the 10 bucks I paid for this month. If nothing else I really wanted to play Tropico 3 big time, which is a brand new game.

Sorry to hear about the steam issue, that'd burn me up too. You sound like a gamer at heart, and I hope GT takes care of you. My biggest beef is with their UX and (lack of) customer care. I simply can't let go of the first issue, I've really really tried, but there are too many flaws in the current system. The poor customer care was the sugar on top. Many of the games didn't work on my (powerful enough) Media Center, and the ones that did couldn't read my XBOX 360 controller input. It's no fun browsing games on a Media Center machine with a keyboard + mouse; the old system natively supported my XBOX 360 controller. Note to anyone that might suggest it: I don't want to use Pinnacle Profiler or any other software to accomplish this, I want it native to the application. So unless GT plans to (re)integrate complete game controller navigation, "...that's a deal breaker!" I really do hope you get the Steam issue worked out since I know you paid good money for those games. Best of luck to you with your new GT subscription, enjoy Tropico 3.

FWIW, if your using a Wireless 360 controller, support for that was always half baked in the old player. Microsoft jacked something up when writing the drivers for that. I've used it plugged in via the play and charge kit before sans problems.

tsrblke2 wrote: FWIW, if your using a Wireless 360 controller, support for that was always half baked in the old player. Microsoft jacked something up when writing the drivers for that. I've used it plugged in via the play and charge kit before sans problems.

When you're on a Media Center PC, it's extremely intuitive to use the controller to navigate so you can seamlessly enter the gaming experience from the application UI. I used both the wired and wireless controllers and they worked great, but I'm sure plenty of people had their fair share of problems. I understand there's no perfect solution, that's not what I'm looking for, just a well thought out one.

brokenidol wrote: When you're on a Media Center PC, it's extremely intuitive to use the controller to navigate so you can seamlessly enter the gaming experience from the application UI. I used both the wired and wireless controllers and they worked great, but I'm sure plenty of people had their fair share of problems. I understand there's no perfect solution, that's not what I'm looking for, just a well thought out one.

well complaining isn't gonna solve anything so just take a chill pill and let the gametap guys do their work

samuraiwarrior41 wrote: brokenidol wrote: When you're on a Media Center PC, it's extremely intuitive to use the controller to navigate so you can seamlessly enter the gaming experience from the application UI. I used both the wired and wireless controllers and they worked great, but I'm sure plenty of people had their fair share of problems. I understand there's no perfect solution, that's not what I'm looking for, just a well thought out one. well complaining isn't gonna solve anything so just take a chill pill and let the gametap guys do their work

Great, another person complaining about me "complaining." Do you not see the conceit in your statement? As a retort, voicing a complaint about a missing or undesired application feature may help correct the problem. As a professional full-time interactive developer, I know. 1) It can enlighten an unaware development team that the problem exists, which does happen in spite of what you may believe about (infallible) developers. 2) It can also encourage other users to voice that the problem is worth addressing. User input has a lot of power in the prioritization of feature roll-outs (at least it should). Regardless of how the GT team responds to insignificant me, it was worth an attempt on my part. Now it's possible, though not necessarily probable, that my suggestions will be taken into account. If I didn't post, it would not only be improbable, but impossible for my suggestions to be taken into account. If you disagree, please offer me a scenario where not posting still allows my concerns to be heard as well as potentially lead to the effects mentioned above. If you can do this, I may take it into account next time I consider posting a "complaint."