Pandora "pandora Live"

[Megagun]

Not many people will bother creating netplay for their games if their netplay won't be played often (read: if players can't easilly connect to eachother). Thus motivation to work on netplay goes down, thus not much netplay at all..

To get netplay *really* going, however, a project like this is vital, as it accounts for a steady(/steadier) playerbase and easy connectivity between clients. Grabbing an IRC client, using that and asking who wants to play a game is probably never ever going to work...

 

[TaG]

To get netplay *really* going, however, a project like this is vital, as it accounts for a steady(/steadier) playerbase and easy connectivity between clients. Grabbing an IRC client, using that and asking who wants to play a game is probably never ever going to work.

+1

Open source is brilliant as it enables those with knowledge and skill to be able to create things they want for the benefit of all. If parag0n has the skill and desire to try this then great. I really hope it succeeds.

The real success of this project will be numbers using it, but most Pandora owners would be likely to give it a go. Two things to help get it on the right path are a clear vision and well planned functionality. So surely this is the time to make constructive suggestions and give encouragement. Who knows, if it works well enough it could persuade some people that would not have bought or even heard of Pandora to buy it based on the netplay capabilities and the publicity it could get.

As a user not a developer, I know that the reason I switch on a device often has no relation to what I end up doing (switch laptop on to check important email, end up browsing for ages, forget email, sorta thing). If there were an IM type daemon that could optionally be set to start on boot it could then show how many users where online, possibly what they were playing and they could possibly invite you to game. I don't know if its possible, but it sounds good to me.

 

[redstar1949]

parag0n, what assistance do you need on this roject and how can other contribute?

Are additional developers needed? A server? Funds? etc.

 

[PoisonedV]

Sorry, I was being a dick.

 

[javaJake]

I almost wonder if the "server" should be an IRC room, and a chosen communication protocol that allows each client to identify who's doing what. That way there's no need for a special server or bot.

Not sure how this could be done securely, though, so that'd need some thought.

Edit: Love the idea, btw, and in the future I might contribute a patch or two as I see the need.

 

[Patrick R Ludvigsen]

I think that IRC would be an excellent idea also, since people can also transmit files using DCC (such as custom maps)

 

[parag0n]

Right now, i´m on holiday for a couple of weeks, i´m playing around with some UI ideas, And i think i´ve nailed how the IPC will work for getting information to & from tinxld.

I´m thinking of building the server software in python, because i forgot to install PHP & lighttpd on my eeepc before i left the UK!

RedStar: Right now i´m fine for resouces thanks, as i share access to a VM with a friend. If the project takes off, i should be able to just upgrade it to deal with the increased need.

 

[BackAssward]

RedStar: Right now i´m fine for resouces thanks, as i share access to a VM with a friend. If the project takes off, i should be able to just upgrade it to deal with the increased need.

I also offer my assistance, as it is. I like the concept, I think there is much merit to it. If you would like a sounding board to toss ideas against, I am happy to participate.

Cheers,

BackAssward

 

[Trip]

I'm here too if you need a tester on Linux.
Good luck with the project, I'm sure it will rock

 

[emil10001]

I'll help too, if I can. Is there going to be a project page for this somewhere? Perhaps a good place to organize ideas, and break things up for different people to work on?

 

[AireTamStorm]

Yes, just like Live is to the 360. except that it's gonna be open and free.

Wouldn't "Pandora Network" be a closer parody in this case then?
Besides, the "Live" branding isn't very strong on anything BUT the 360 in m$'s case...

 

[parag0n]

Theres a page on the wiki currently, And i´ll be posting some more work i´ve been doing on the IPC protocol while i´ve been away when i get home tonight.

If people want to chat about impementation etc, i´ll be hanging around in #tinxl on freenode from tonight, so you can grab me there.

 

[BackAssward]

Theres a page on the wiki currently, And i´ll be posting some more work i´ve been doing on the IPC protocol while i´ve been away when i get home tonight.

If people want to chat about impementation etc, i´ll be hanging around in #tinxl on freenode from tonight, so you can grab me there.

parag0n, an N64 emulator development group just brought on a guy to do a custom on line multilayer solution. Since it's early in development (I am guessing on that point), perhaps this is a good opportunity to get an active multiplayer developer informed of the TINXL project. To get cross platform implementations going right off the bat (or share ideas or w/e). I'll PM you his email address if you feel like chatting. He did have a notice out there that he was looking for a project to work on. I've emailed him about the Pandora, hopefully we'll get a bite.

 

[parag0n]

BackAssward: Cool! Let me know if you hear anything back from him.

I've updated the wiki with some information about how i think the IPC should work, any comments would be appreciated.

Also, thought i'd mirror this over here:
An interesting thought i had about TINXL is that it could provide a central pandora UPnP port request mechanism, so the TINXL Client could automatically request the ports a game requires to be a server are opened from a UPnP enabled router. Obviously this will not work for all networks, but should make multiplayer gaming a bit easier for the regular user.

 

[emil10001]

Personally, I'd rather not see UPnP used, mostly due to security concerns.

Why not just define a port or a couple of ports to use, and standardize on that?

 

[Trip]

Personally, I'd rather not see UPnP used, mostly due to security concerns.

Why not just define a port or a couple of ports to use, and standardize on that?

I agree. Ports are a complete pain in the butt when it comes to games but UPnP is a good idea with a bad implementation.
Besides, wouldn't UPnP be best handled by firmware.. if at all?

 

[emil10001]

I just don't want to enable UPnP on my router. It's security over functionality on this one; I don't want to run the risk of someone taking over my router.

 

[Orkie]

I just don't want to enable UPnP on my router. It's security over functionality on this one; I don't want to run the risk of someone taking over my router.

Fine, lock yours to a port then but I would quite like to have the option of using UPnP.

 

[atomicthumbs]

AFAIK, UPnP is not a security risk.

As long as you're using adequate antivirus and malware protection.

...

You are, right?

 

[emil10001]

The issue is that with UPnP enabled, should you happen upon a website with some malicious flash embedded, it could open up ports on your router.

http://it.slashdot.org/it/08/01/14/1319256.shtml

I guess it's not a huge concern, but I don't really like the idea of applications controlling my router. This is something that screams out at me in the same way that having normal users running as administrator all the time on Windows screams out at me. I don't trust applications with my home network in the same way that I don't trust applications with my root filesystem. It's not necessarily *this* application that I'm worried about, it's that I would need to have that service enabled, leaving the door open for something else to screw things up.