New Server Browser (dev branch)

[R3vo 2654]

The #1 issue that would need to be resolve to make this feasible is to find a way to change the Steam Workshop EULA. Currently, it prevents many major mods from being uploaded to the Steam workshop, which will result in making this solution non-functional for any server using one of those major mods.

 

Once that is dealt with and all major mods can be shared on Steam Workshop without hurting the developers in any way due to bad licensing, the next most important issues I would anticipate is proper differentiation between server mods (run on server, not needed on client), required mods (currently can only require mods via mission.sqm), and optional mods (either running or not running on server, but allowed for client). Preferably, this should be easy to configure for server admins, and have good defaults for servers that don't take the time to carefully define said values.

 

I really hope to see all issues dealt with, so that we no longer need 3rd party software and websites just to get the mods needed to play on a favorite server or explore new servers.

I agree. Before putting endless hours in an automatic update system for workshop mods, the abovementioned issue should be solved.

My communities actually has plans to only use mods available on Workshop since it's the easiest and most transparent way for players to get their modset up-to-date, however, there are some important mods which are still not available via Workshop becaus eof the EULA. One mod we are missing for example is TFAR/ACRE2. I could live with RHS not coming to workshop, since it's a mod which we only use for special missions. But not using radio mods? No way!

 

I really hope you can find a solution to this by talking to Valve.

[bad benson 1733]

One mod we are missing for example is TFAR/ACRE2.

 

i see. any info on the reasons? is it only due to the TS files and maybe DLLs not being supported by the workshop or also EULA problems?

 

if it's the former i think it's a bearable exception that just comes with the technical nature of those radio addons. i don't see how that makes BI's efforts useless.

[R3vo 2654]

i don't see how that makes BI's efforts useless.

 

 

I've never said that ;)

 

i see. any info on the reasons? is it only due to the TS files and maybe DLLs not being supported by the workshop or also EULA problems?

 

 

Gonna check that and report back! Dlls files are definitely possible, ACE does it too

 

 

Another random thought:

 

Would it technically be possible that the launcher gets access to the Armaholic database and searches for mods?

[bad benson 1733]

I've never said that ;)

 

 

Gonna check that and report back! Dlls files are definitely possible, ACE does it too

 

 

Another random thought:

 

Would it technically be possible that the launcher gets access to the Armaholic database and searches for mods?

 

well you kind of implied endless hours would be wasted if it's not solved before that. but that's jsut semantics, not important. i just disagree that it's a central issue.

 

on radio stuff. good to know about DLLs. although the TS files remain as a problem probably. i mean the plugin stuff you need to put into the TS folder.

 

armaholic integration would be great. kind of curious about external mirrors as a feature too.

[galzohar 31]

RHS is missing for EULA reasons. While some might be able to live with it, others will have to use a different method to update their mods automatically if they wish to join servers using RHS.

 

Of course, since the problem is the EULA, RHS is really just an example. There really shouldn't be anything that will discourage mod authors from publishing their mods on Steam if it is meant to be used as the go-to automatic mod install/upload/activate tool.

 

A soultion for mods such as TFAR is needed too, but that would obviously be more complicated, and in this case it really is an exception that we might have to live with. But at least the Arma side of things should be installed and updated automatically. Then again, other tools can get the DLLs in the right place and even launch Teamspeak with the right server, so it's really something that the official launcher should support as well.

[R3vo 2654]

well you kind of implied endless hours would be wasted if it's not solved before that. but that's jsut semantics, not important. i just disagree that it's a central issue.

 

I probably worded it too harshly, was definitely not meant this way.

 

Then again, other tools can get the DLLs in the right place and even launch Teamspeak with the right server, so it's really something that the official launcher should support as well.

 

If that's truly the only reason why TFAR is not on workshop I believe it not a big deal. As you said, other programms can also copy files from one directory into another. A simple popup dialogue which asks for a director to copy files to would probably work.

And whether a dialogue is required or not could be defined in the mod.cpp by the modder?!?

 

On the other hand, can't believe that's the only reason for TFAR, a simple not in the description of the mod, or even a batch file which will automatically search for the ts.exe to find the right folder would solve that issue.

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

My thoughts on server browsers.

 

95% of players are playing just 4-5 (tired) gamemodes. Usually an individual player just plays one gamemode when they boot up ArmA.

 

There's a lot of cool and interesting content out there, which is never played.

 

I think the server browser has a role to play in exposing players to new and interesting ideas.

 

What I am finding these days is a lot of people just hammer away at one gamemode, then they "get tired of ArmA" and quit playing altogether. I think the server browser should be the first place bored players turn to, rather than the steam games library.

 

A 'gamemodes/missions' browser, if you will.

 

 

Also three buttons I'd like to see in the server browser

 

1 - Official servers

2 - Community Spotlight server

3 - Random server

 

 

 

 

 

I actually meant that what you linked, though that really depends how the filter system will work in the end. I meant that it maybe should be bit more specific list. It maybe comes that it's just weird to see that Invade & Annex use Co-op, when I'd say it's CTI. The list could contain very popular gamemodes/mods like Life, Wasteland, King Of The Hill, Invade & Annex, Domination and so on if possible.

 

CTI traditionally involves players on multiple teams.

 

What I have found is that the regulars in Co-op gamemodes are generally not interested in PvP/TvT human adversarial gamemodes. I symapthize with this as I am one of them :) Long gone are the days where I have enough time to devote to PvP/TvT skills to have fun in such gamemodes. Result is I get thrashed in human adversarial gamemodes, by people who have more time to commit to playing it than I. I'm sure some of the BI devs here can sympathize

 

A long-winded explanation of why the Co-op header is used instead of CTI.

[Tankbuster 1747]

I switch to dev branch for the first time since 1.00 just to have a look at the server browser.

 

I liked it.

 

That is all.

[KeyCat 131]

This is something you dev's probably don't want to hear but since I don't use the launcher I wonder if the old browser will be available in game "as is"?

 

Or maybe even better to be able to make your own "server list" in game - nothing fancy just to be able to add and remove in  list of servers yourself. I'm aware about the "Recent" tab but it get cluttered when you tested a few servers before you find a good one. The remote button only holds one IP#/FQD so it's only useful if you play on one server exclusively.

 

/KC

[R3vo 2654]

To avoid a potential confusion: we do not plan to remove the ability to connect to a multiplayer session directly from the game. We are well aware that not everyone uses our Launcher and our goal is to keep the game fully playable even without it.

 

From the OPREP

[KeyCat 131]

Maybe I miss read the OPREP but I read it as they only plan to keep the "Remote" button but remove the Server list page.

 

/KC
 

[bad benson 1733]

i always wonder why people don't use the launcher. at this point it really is doing the same thing you'd do anyways but much more convenient. maybe lack of promotion of it? or just stubborn nostalgic arma people? :lol: or better alternatives (3rd aprty launchers)?

 

each to their own ofc. just wondering why since pretty much everything you can customize (start parameters, local mods) is in there and easy to use. maybe i'm just a launcher fanboy though. i just remember many occasions with friends where they loaad wrong mods and stuff and take so long to fix it and i always tell them to use the launcher but they never do. the power of habit.

 

it's awesome though that all the old stuff is still there so everythign is an option.

[teabagginpeople 398]

For me recently played has been a god send. so thanks for this. ability to remove from recently played servers . Ones you didn't like for what ever reason. With the favorites working and recently played having this option to remove.would be a great way of getting in the type of servers you want to play on, fast.

[R3vo 2654]

or just stubborn nostalgic arma people?

 

Guess that's about 95%, the rest are people who are missing some features, like grouping of mods and connecting startup parameters to a mod preset. ( I am not trying to point out some features I am missing :P )

[bad benson 1733]

you can group mods into profiles though. but i agree that groups that also can be combined would be great. maybe check boxes on the list of profiles so you can combine them and if they have doubles it recognises it. that could work.

[galzohar 31]

Six supports mods not available on workshop, supports task force radio automatic install/update, and makes it easier to create a single-click join button for players who want to join your server. These are more than enough reasons to not use the launcher.

[R3vo 2654]

Six has one of the worst UIs, how can somebody use six but not be able to install tfar manually.

[inlesco 234]

i always wonder why people don't use the launcher. at this point it really is doing the same thing you'd do anyways but much more convenient. maybe lack of promotion of it? or just stubborn nostalgic arma people? :lol: or better alternatives (3rd aprty launchers)?

 

each to their own ofc. just wondering why since pretty much everything you can customize (start parameters, local mods) is in there and easy to use. maybe i'm just a launcher fanboy though. i just remember many occasions with friends where they loaad wrong mods and stuff and take so long to fix it and i always tell them to use the launcher but they never do. the power of habit.

 

it's awesome though that all the old stuff is still there so everythign is an option.

But - if you forbid the old ways of doing things when there's a new one present and far more convenient, reliable and comfortable?

 

People'd be forced to adapt to the changes and everyone would be happy. Just give it time.

 

Same goes for the web - some still use IE6-8+, but we tell them to fuck off and use at least IE10-11 because it'll certainly make their life better. :D

[c14 1]

Just read the OPREP for the new server browser.

Apart from the filtering for mods, I'd love to see filtering for game settings, especially 3rd person and crosshair.

(already made a feature request back in alpha this here: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=11791)

 

In my opinion, only filtering for the server name and the needed mods is definitely not enough

for a game like Arma that attracts such a variety of gamers from arcade to hardcore.

 

Complex name filters with regex and what not are only a work-around and will never work satisfactorily

because there is no standardized way of encoding the game settings into the server name.

Instead, the server should send its main game settings via standardized key-value pairs to the client

where they can be used to filter.

[DarkDruid 96]

Apart from the filtering for mods, I'd love to see filtering for game settings, especially 3rd person and crosshair.

(already made a feature request back in alpha this here: http://feedback.arma...w.php?id=11791)

 

In my opinion, only filtering for the server name and the needed mods is definitely not enough

for a game like Arma that attracts such a variety of gamers from arcade to hardcore.

We definitely plan to offer more complex filtering. Filtering according to the game settings mentioned by you should be a part of the final version of Server Browser.

[INF_MIke64 53]

Its obliviously a Issue that not all mods are on Steam Workshop due to it EULA. Personally I don't think we can change that but what if there was a way of plugging in a alternative download method Play with six for example so users can choose if they wish to use Steam workshop or *Insert External Vendor here* 

 

It would work kinda like this. 

1. Attempt to join Server without all necessary mods.
2. Warning message with a list of missing mods with download buttons for Steam, one or more external sources
3. User selects sources for each mod. 
4. Requests sent to sources to download
5. Sources send back status messages 
6. When done Launch game into server

What do you guys think Is it too much to ask?

[R3vo 2654]

Just had an idea of a potential issue that could appear in the future, when mod download is automated.

How will the launcher handle mod updates via Workshop in the future? Right now it updates immediately the latest version, however, that could potentially cause issues in the future, when players recieve updates immediately but servers obviously won't.

 

An idea I had, would be, that players could set their launcher to keep older versions for X amount of days, so they are still able to play on their favorite servers until those get updated.

[RoF 241]

Just had an idea of a potential issue that could appear in the future, when mod download is automated.

How will the launcher handle mod updates via Workshop in the future? Right now it updates immediately the latest version, however, that could potentially cause issues in the future, when players recieve updates immediately but servers obviously won't.

 

An idea I had, would be, that players could set their launcher to keep older versions for X amount of days, so they are still able to play on their favorite servers until those get updated.

 

Better way would be like Space Engineers, you can set the server to download mods from the workshop. That way client and server is always up to date

[chortles 263]

But - if you forbid the old ways of doing things when there's a new one present and far more convenient, reliable and comfortable?

Mind you, that's already going to happen with the eventual removal of the 2D Editor...

Its obliviously a Issue that not all mods are on Steam Workshop due to it EULA. Personally I don't think we can change that but what if there was a way of plugging in a alternative download method Play with six for example so users can choose if they wish to use Steam workshop or *Insert External Vendor here* 

 

It would work kinda like this.

• Attempt to join Server without all necessary mods.
• Warning message with a list of missing mods with download buttons for Steam, one or more external sources
• User selects sources for each mod. 
• Requests sent to sources to download
• Sources send back status messages 
• When done Launch game into server

What do you guys think Is it too much to ask?

According to the OPREP, yes:

At this time it is necessary to mention that this functionality will be highly dependent on Steam Workshop, from which we download all missing mods. Unfortunately, this means that we are not able to support this functionality in case of mods distributed in any other way. When any such mod is required, we let you know that there is a missing mod which we are not able to get automatically for you. We plan to look into this area in the future; however, our current research indicates that we might not be able to overcome all technical obstacles and, therefore, the support of local mods in the future is still an open question. Furthermore, you will be still forced to restart the game when (un)loading any mods; this is a restriction we are not able to overcome.

[R3vo 2654]

Has anyone else the problem that the browser eats alot of CPU performance ? For me it's 20-40% on a 3570k