PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (1) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
Up The Creek
June 18th 2000, 06:47 CEST by andy

It's the end of an era for our little community, as the archive at Walnut Creek (cdrom.com) will no longer provide free mirrors of gaming files.



Walnut Creek has always played a major part in the community as it allowed user-created mods and levels to be distributed for free with no bandwidth restrictions. The service also helped to distribute official files by Id Software, 3D Realms and Epic, as well as being the meat on the bones of several big gaming sites, in particular GameSpy's FilePlanet.

Now operating under new management, Walnut Creek wants payment for all that disk space and bandwidth. Fair enough, I hear you cry, but two of their long-term 'partners' have decided that this is out of the question...

In a polite but slightly bitter e-mail sent out to all sites on the GameSpy network this week, hosting relations director Todd Northcutt comments:

Some sad news today, as long-time partners CDROM.com informed us that they will no longer be mirroring our files. They have been partners for a number of years, helping us to spread gaming goodness around the globe.

That's not strictly true, is it? The new owners of Walnut Creek have said that they will be charging for hosting, and the GameSpy folks don't want to pay. Yet the information is being presented to hosted sites in a way that suggests Walnut Creek is being selfish, and has suddenly 'abandoned' gamers.

The e-mail goes on to say that Walnut Creek's new owners are "seeking to monetize the services". True, but so what? They've been providing unlimited free bandwidth for years, but now that has changed and they are being painted as the bad guys! Sounds a bit ungrateful to me.

Amusingly, there's a new banner ad circulating on the GameSpy network, inviting ISP's to "get noticed at FilePlanet". Click on the ad and you're taken to a page asking for new mirrors. The whole page is a bit backwards, and makes it sound like ISP's should be grateful for GameSpy's gracious invitation! (And just think -- for providing all that valuable bandwidth, they get a free link. Aren't they lucky?)

There's some similar spin going on over at 3D Realms, with a message on the company web site that says:

If you've ever downloaded a file from a link on our web site here, you've downloaded from our old FTP location at cdrom.com. Well, cdrom.com has decided to "change their policy" regarding people who have file locations there, so we decided to move.

Again, that's not really accurate, is it? Walnut Creek has started charging, and 3DR doesn't want to pay so they've moved elsewhere. Passing it off as some sort of moral decision is not only misleading -- it's very unfair to Walnut Creek.

The attitude exhibited by both GameSpy and 3D Realms is indicative of the immaturity and "spoilt brat" syndrome present in the games industry and its satellite companies. You can practically hear them stamping their feet and shouting "not fair!" because they haven't got their own way.

Although I'm disappointed by this turn of events, it's also understandable, and overall I agree with it. The generosity of Walnut Creek's previous owners was, basically, being abused. I mean, going back to FilePlanet -- when did you ever see a message there with just a simple word of thanks for all the free bandwidth? It was taken for granted. FilePlanet has always been promoted as a service provided by GameSpy, when really it was just a pretty front-end to Walnut Creek and its various mirrors.

Also, consider that a lot of the files being mirrored were game patches weighing in at several megs and being downloaded by tens of thousands of people. Why should the Walnut Creek owners pay for that? Maybe the incompetent games companies should arrange their own international mirrors and pay for it themselves? It would be interesting to see how patching was handled if the companies responsible had to pay thousands of dollars for bandwidth.

C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Up The Creek

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by "asdf"
2000-06-18 06:54:41
first maybe for once?
#2 by "RahvinTaka"
2000-06-18 06:58:30
donaldp@mad.scientist.com
all I have to say really is "Here Here"<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#3 by "Fortyseven[BTEG]"
2000-06-18 07:03:00
47@spacemoose.com http://hac47.dhs.org
<b>#Main Post</b> "andy" wrote...
<QUOTE>Walnut Creek has always played a major part in the community as it allowed
user-created mods and levels to be distributed for free with no bandwidth
restrictions. The service also helped to distribute official files by Id
Software, 3D Realms and Epic, as well as being the meat on the bones of
several big gaming sites, in particular GameSpy's FilePlanet.</QUOTE>

Call me funny, but when you reach the "big leagues" and become a sucessful money making company, isn't it time to host your own files instead of leeching off a free service?  Now, I dunno if any of the people mentioned made donations of any kind to Walnut Creek or not (sounds like this isn't the case)..  But how can someone create an entire website (FilePlanet) as a front end like that?  Was GameSpy even officially authorized to do it, or was it just taken for granted because it's free?

Crazy shit...sucks to lose a free service, but sucks worse to have it used in that manner.  I wonder if this was the sole motivation behind them "changing their policy", or if it was just incidental...<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#4 by "Andy"
2000-06-18 07:04:21
andy@planetcrap.com
Another thing -- demos.

Over on the FilePlanet front page at the moment there are five promotional files being 'advertised'. (Not the right word, but I can't think of a better one.) They are:

Deus Ex demo. (139.4 Mb)
Starlancer demo. (72 Mb)
Flying Heroes demo. (92.4 Mb)
Halo "mini-trailer" movie. (13.3 Mb)
NASCAR Racing 4 movie. (33.3 Mb)

Those five files alone add up to 350.4 Mb, and they are all essentially advertising -- demos and movies put out by companies to advertise products.

What FilePlanet was asking, essentially, was for Walnut Creek to pay for that advertising. And worse still, FilePlanet would then claim all the glory.

Yep, the more I think about this, the more it tickles me. The new cdrom.com owners have made the right decision, and personally I think it's funny to see GameSpy getting upset about it. They've had it coming for ages, it's just happened at a rather inconvenient time.
#5 by "Andy"
2000-06-18 07:13:38
andy@planetcrap.com
<b>#3</b>, Fortyseven[BTEG]:
<QUOTE>
Now, I dunno if any of the people mentioned made donations of any kind to Walnut Creek or not (sounds like this isn't the case)
</QUOTE>
About a year ago, two games networks (Frag.com and Telefragged) were kicked off Walnut Creek by Joost Schuur, who maintained the gaming files section and 'coincidentally' worked for GameSpy. (And still does.)

At the time, one of the defences used by a GameSpy rep was that both Frag.com and Telefragged received their storage and bandwidth for free, while GameSpy paid.

Now, the e-mail sent out to hosted sites this week states that GameSpy files were mirrored for free. So either the rep a year ago was lying, or the e-mail this week was lying.

Either way, someone's full o' shit! ;-)
#6 by "Apache"
2000-06-18 07:21:21
<quote>Walnut Creek has always played a major part in the community as it allowed user-created mods and levels to be distributed for free with no bandwidth restrictions. The service also helped to distribute official files by Id Software, 3D Realms and Epic, as well as being the meat on the bones of several big gaming sites, in particular GameSpy's FilePlanet.</quote>

Welcome to the real world.
#7 by "Snord"
2000-06-18 07:23:00
As i understood it, they tried to make money by selling CDs with the files they hosted on it, and when most people get better connections (except me) those sales slowed down and now they want to charge for space, just like a web hosting company. Makes sense. I guess we'll beat on GSI again. Cheap ungrateful bastards, heh.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#8 by "Andy"
2000-06-18 07:25:19
andy@planetcrap.com
<b>#6</b>, Apache:

Heh, that was directed at GameSpy I assume? Pretty much sums up what I was thinking. They've had it too easy for too long, and now they'll have to compete on a level playing field.

I bet the frag/telefragged guys are laughing their asses off! :)
#9 by "Apache"
2000-06-18 07:31:22
Andy: Yep.

I remembering seeing the ISP bill after we cranked up the warzone ftp to 1000 users and hosted the UT demo. = ouch

Bandwidth costs a LOT.
#10 by "Fortyseven[BTEG]"
2000-06-18 07:37:05
47@spacemoose.com http://hac47.dhs.org
<b>#5</b> "Andy" wrote...
<quote>
Now, the e-mail sent out to hosted sites this week states that GameSpy files were mirrored for free. So either the rep a year ago was lying, or the e-mail this week was lying.

Either way, someone's full o' shit! ;-)
</QUOTE>

It would be interesting indeed to dig up those old documents and publically compare them with this.  Nothing like kicking up a little shit. <i>;)</i><I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#11 by "Warren Marshall"
2000-06-18 07:51:41
warren@epicgames.com http://www.epicgames.com
I wonder if Joost was being paid for all those years that he maintained the archives at cdrom.com ... Oops, sorry, didn't mean to cast a ray of sobriety into yet another bash-GSI keg party.

Sorry, carry on ...
#12 by "Fortyseven[BTEG]"
2000-06-18 07:53:22
47@spacemoose.com http://hac47.dhs.org
<i><b>*hic*</b></i><I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#13 by "Snord"
2000-06-18 07:59:01
<b>#11</b> "Warren Marshall" wrote...
<QUOTE>Oops, sorry, didn't mean to cast a ray of
sobriety into yet another bash-GSI keg party</QUOTE>

Sobriety? Whats that? :)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#14 by "Serpwidgets"
2000-06-18 08:07:09
serpwidgets@hotmail.com http://people.ce.mediaone.net/serpwidgets/index.ht
It just sounds so similar to the Green Fedora Empire's MO. It's good to see them recieve the same ass-ramming they have been giving out for so long.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#15 by "RahvinTaka"
2000-06-18 08:18:32
donaldp@mad.scientist.com
<b>#11</b> "Warren Marshall" wrote...
<QUOTE>I wonder if Joost was being paid for all those years that he maintained the archives at cdrom.com ... Oops, sorry, didn't mean to cast a ray of sobriety into yet another bash-GSI keg party.</QUOTE>

and if he wasn't ?
From what people said here he had authoritative control over archive that would probably cost the owners close to $30,000+ a month to host. And considering he works at gamespy and they have effectively made a shitload of cash of the service ... combine that with the ego boost he gets and the ability to undermine hios rivals .... I think the kickbacks are quite enough thank you very much.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#16 by "Charlie Wiederhold"
2000-06-18 09:16:36
charliew@3drealms.com
<quote>Again, that's not really accurate, is it? Walnut Creek has started charging, and 3DR doesn't want to pay so they've moved elsewhere. Passing it off as some sort of moral decision is not only misleading -- it's very unfair to Walnut Creek.</quote>

They decided to go from a free service to a charge service. The statement on the 3DR page states that CDROM.com decided to change their policy.

Going from a free service to a pay service sounds like a rather large change in policy to me.

There wasn't any negative griping towards CDROM.com, nor complaining that they had changed their policy. They changed their policy, 3DR decided to move elsewhere and stated as much (where it was most likely cheaper than what CDROM.com wanted to charge).

*shrug*

I think most people will agree that CDROM.com has needed to charge for it's space for quite some time. Especially people in the industry. While they offered the service for free, it was great for everyone (except them it seems) so now they have made the choices they needed to make. Fair enough, thanks for the time guys... we'll go where the best deal is now that you are no longer free, good luck!

Charlie Wiederhold
#17 by "Fortyseven[BTEG]"
2000-06-18 09:20:20
47@spacemoose.com http://hac47.dhs.org
How many people, when they saw the topic title, thought this was going to be an Ion Storm/Killcreek subject? :)

<i>[raises hand]</i><I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#18 by "Brandon 'GreenMarine' Reinhart"
2000-06-18 09:29:48
brandonr@3drealms.com http://www.3drealms.com
[raises hand]

However, I think CDROM should of been charging for their services years ago.

Take that Linux community! :PP
#19 by "Andy"
2000-06-18 09:33:47
andy@planetcrap.com
<b>#16</b>, Charlie Wiederhold:
<QUOTE>
They decided to go from a free service to a charge service. The statement on the 3DR page states that CDROM.com decided to change their policy.

Going from a free service to a pay service sounds like a rather large change in policy to me.
</QUOTE>
The message could have said: "We've been getting this service for free, now they've asked us to pay, but we don't want to so we're going somewhere else." That would have been the truth. The explanation given on 3DR's web site gives a very different impression.

This sort of tricky word-play is the reason why, in court, you're sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Because "the truth" can often be misleading.

Suppose, three years ago, you'd been convicted for murder, but a year later you appealed, proved your innocence and the conviction was overturned. Would you be happy for a journalist writing about violent games to say: "An employee of 3D Realms, Charlie Wiederhold, who three years ago was convicted for murder, has often defended his right to possess a firearm."

If you'd object to that, why? After all, it's true. (Or would be, hypothetically.)
#20 by "Apache"
2000-06-18 09:49:23
As far as game companies who rely on CDROM, they really don't have to anymore. Dozens of websites provide mirrors of files, most don't use CDROM :)

Should companies host their own files? Yes -- customers expect them to. Should they pay tens of thousands of dollars a month? Well -- start running ad banners or something. ;)

I'd love to see blizzard's ISP bills, whoa...
#21 by "sgershen"
2000-06-18 09:59:48
sgershen@megsinet.net
<b>Andy</b> (#19):

Really, I think you are reading too much into 3drealms.com site... it didn't give me the impression to me that you think it does anyway.

<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#22 by ""
2000-06-18 10:32:56
#20 id like to see blizzards profits from diablo 2. even just from preorders. :)
#23 by "G-Man"
2000-06-18 10:33:59
jonmars@shiftlock.org http://www.shiftlock.org
<b>#21</b> "sgershen" wrote...
<QUOTE>

<B>Andy</B> (#19):

Really, I think you are reading too much into 3drealms.com site... it didn't give me the impression to me that you think it does anyway.

</QUOTE>
From what I've seen over the last year or two, I think that it is safe to assume that Andy lives in a <i>very</i> strange world.

 - [g.man]<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#24 by "sgershen"
2000-06-18 10:39:12
sgershen@megsinet.net
I guess the point I was trying to make is that I don't see why 3drealms has to tell us why they decided to move away from cdrom.com on their own website, they just need to inform their customers that there is a new location ... obviously we all know why, but I think from a first reading of this, it was perfectly fine way it was written on the 3drealms site.


<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#25 by "Apache"
2000-06-18 10:42:48
#22: yep, 1.5 million pre-orders is not bad :)
#26 by "Andy"
2000-06-18 10:54:12
andy@planetcrap.com
<b>#24</b>, sgershen:

Well I disagree. :)

They wanted to save face -- fair enough -- but in doing so they tried to make Walnut Creek look bad, and that wasn't right. Five, six, seven, however many years of free bandwidth, and that's the thanks they get.

I just think it would have been nice for 3DR to be a bit more upfront and admit that it was purely a money thing. Instead they made out that cdrom.com was doing something wrong, at least that's how I read it.

Are good manners too much to ask for from these people?
#27 by "RahvinTaka"
2000-06-18 11:03:36
donaldp@mad.scientist.com
<b>#26</b> "Andy" wrote...
<QUOTE>Are good manners too much to ask for from these people?
</QUOTE>

thems be fighting words :P

While it would have been nice/appropriate for them to thank cdrom.com considering the gave em free stuff for years I now think that they proly didn't intend any negativity towards the cdrom.com. So the worst you can accuse them of being is thoughtless not deliberately malicious which is what your going for ???<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#28 by "sgershen"
2000-06-18 11:07:42
sgershen@megsinet.net
<b>Andy</b> (#26):
<QUOTE>
Well I disagree. :)
</QUOTE>

I guess we agree to disagree then! :-)

<QUOTE>
They wanted to save face -- fair enough -- but in doing so they tried to make Walnut Creek look bad, and that wasn't right. Five, six, seven, however many years of free bandwidth, and that's the thanks they get.
</QUOTE>

that's how you've chosen to take it, see Charlie Wiederhold's comments (#16): for how he feels about it.

Oh well time to go to sleep...



<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#29 by "G-Man"
2000-06-18 11:40:28
jonmars@shiftlock.org http://www.shiftlock.org
<b>#25</b> "Apache" wrote...
<QUOTE>
#22: yep, 1.5 million pre-orders is not bad :)</QUOTE>
1.5 million?! Are you serious?!

Diablo II ain't <b>THAT</b> good.

 - [g.man]<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#30 by "Charlie Wiederhold"
2000-06-18 11:44:47
charliew@3drealms.com
<QUOTE>This sort of tricky word-play is the reason why, in court, you're sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Because "the truth" can often be misleading.

Suppose, three years ago, you'd been convicted for murder, but a year later you appealed, proved your innocence and the conviction was overturned. Would you be happy for a journalist writing about violent games to say: "An employee of 3D Realms, Charlie Wiederhold, who three years ago was convicted for murder, has often defended his right to possess a firearm."</QUOTE>

This sort of "tricky" wordplay that you describe in your second paragraph runs rampant in media based writing all the time, as well as in a court of law.

Lawyers are paid on how well they can phrase things to paint the topic in a different manner. You have one way of reading into what was written on the 3DR news page, and you see it attempting to paint CDROM.com for doing something wrong. I and several others don't.

The same thing happens all the time with topic updates on Planetcrap, etc. I don't doubt we can't find numerous instances where things could have been phrased more "truthfully" in any of the topics by you, Seth, Tom, etc. I'm used to it though because people tend to not think about how something might be read by someone who holds a completely opposite opinion or point of view on a subject.

Anything can be worded more truthfully based on your perspective of an issue and what you want the statement to say.

By the way, from what I understand the thanks CDROM.com got from having those files hosted on their site, was that they had the right to package and sell those files. Nobody else had that ability. That market started to dry up, bummer. Now they have to find another way to make their money. It was a win win situation for all parties involved until the way CDROM.com used to make their money stopped working anymore.

I don't think any extra thanks are really needed. It's not like they were doing it out of the goodness of their own hearts, otherwise they wouldn't have had to start charging.

Charlie Wiederhold
#31 by "Andy"
2000-06-18 11:55:08
andy@planetcrap.com
<b>#30</b>, Charlie Wiederhold:
<QUOTE>
The same thing happens all the time with topic updates on Planetcrap, etc. I don't doubt we can't find numerous instances where things could have been phrased more "truthfully" in any of the topics by you, Seth, Tom, etc.
</QUOTE>
I'm sure there are times when things are not explained properly, but there is never any attempt to mislead people. I trust you're not suggesting that there is?

Everything else: Fair enough.

BTW, and I'm not being sarcastic, have you thought of handling public relations for 3DR and Apogee? At least as far as stuff on the net is concerned.

Scott and George are two of the most unconvincing, disagreeable, insincere and downright aggressive company reps I've ever known, whereas you're pretty much the opposite.

Really, I think you'd be good at PR, and good in a good way, if you know what I mean.
#32 by "shaithis"
2000-06-18 12:09:45
chrisb@gamespy.com http://www.gamespy.com
<B>FilePlanet has always been promoted as a service provided by GameSpy, when really it was just a pretty front-end to Walnut Creek and its various mirrors.</B>

If you knew anything about how FilePlanet actually works, you'd realize the complete inaccuracy of that statement. Clearly, you do not.

And that's all I'm going to say on this entire thread, because I know way more about the whole Walnut Creek thing than I am allowed to talk about.

-shai
(who's not defending his company, he's defending the hard work of a good friend)
#33 by "RahvinTaka"
2000-06-18 12:29:33
donaldp@mad.scientist.com
<b>#32</b> "shaithis" wrote...
<QUOTE>If you knew anything about how FilePlanet actually works, you'd realize the
complete inaccuracy of that statement. Clearly, you do not. </QUOTE>

well nor do the rest of us if you don't say anything. So then why even bother posting ? I don't know dick about how it works and had always assumed that FilePlanet was GameSpys. So which parts innacurate ?

If your saying that FilePlanet wasn't promoted as a GameSpy thing then you are wrong because me as a naieve user assumed it was.

If you are saying FilePlanet didn't get most of it's service from cdrom.com .... maybe you are right ... I don't know. But by popping in here with some nebulous comment and then going away is more damaging than not saying anything in the first place.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#34 by "Andy"
2000-06-18 12:33:18
andy@planetcrap.com
<b>#32</b>, shaithis:
<QUOTE>
If you knew anything about how FilePlanet actually works, you'd realize the complete inaccuracy of that statement. Clearly, you do not.
</QUOTE>
Ah, the age-old "<i>you don't know everything, therefore you know nothing</i>".

FilePlanet relies on servers around the world mirroring files. Until recently, most of them were connected in some way to Walnut Creek. What else do I need to know? (I do know more than that, of course, but I don't see how the technical details are relevant.)

Why don't you give people an example of my boundless ignorance? Why don't you tell them something that proves the "complete inaccuracy" of the statement? If it's completely inaccurate, you should at least be able to have a stab at explaining why, shouldn't you?
<QUOTE>
And that's all I'm going to say on this entire thread, because I know way more about the whole Walnut Creek thing than I am allowed to talk about.
</QUOTE>
So I'm wrong, but you can't say why? Wow, what a convincing argument!

Hey shai, I hear GSI has a private server that pumps out an average of 6Gb's of warez a day. I can't say any more than that, though. I'm not allowed to.
#35 by "Andy"
2000-06-18 12:50:51
andy@planetcrap.com
Apparently I was more right than I thought I was. The five servers FilePlanet currently uses are:

Los Angeles, CA  FilePlanet FTP 1
Long Island, NY  Netline Internet Solutions
Qld Australia  Global Info-Links (two servers)
Milano Italy  NGI

All of those five servers (yes, including the FilePlanet one) have been introduced since the Walnut Creek mirrors ended. In other words, <b>all</b> files referenced by FilePlanet were, until this week, on either Walnut Creek or one of the mirrors.

So let's recap on the statement that Shai disagreed with:
<quote>
FilePlanet has always been promoted as a service provided by GameSpy, when really it was just a pretty front-end to Walnut Creek and its various mirrors.
</quote>
With the 'evidence' above, I'd say that was a fair statement. Sure, someone at GameSpy must put a lot of effort into organising all the directories, and it's a nifty bit of scripting, but the fact remains that all of the server space and bandwidth was provided by Walnut Creek and the mirror servers. Hence, it's just a pretty front-end.

Let the ad hominem attacks begin! ;-)
#36 by "PiRaMidA"
2000-06-18 16:18:57
piramida@usa.net http://www.agsm.net
<b>#35</b> "Andy" wrote...
<QUOTE>All of those five servers (yes, including the FilePlanet one) have been introduced since the Walnut Creek mirrors ended. In other words, all files referenced by FilePlanet were, until this week, on either Walnut Creek or one of the mirrors.
</QUOTE>

I think GSI had their own ftp server for about a year - year and a half maybe. Anyway, all other download locations were cdrom/cdrom mirrors. They really should have paid, but we do not know how much Walnut Creek was charging? Maybe they wanted their money for the years of free operation back? That would make everyone back out of the deal.

On the sad side, now almost every Quake util/map/mod/anything site has to update download links, and millions of these sites would remain pointing to CDRom as they are not being updated anymore... A shame really - as you already pointed out, it simply kills the old community :(

Btw, I never used the new FilePlanet anyway, because it's ASP just does not work for me, but the cdrom.com and it's worldwide mirrors was the best resource that the gaming community could dream of... Would they just rm -rf /pub/quake now? All files are still in place however. It would be so much better if they decided to keep all the community files intact, just closing folders like /planetquake and other corporation's free bandwidth pipelines.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#37 by "Sgt Hulka"
2000-06-18 16:50:54
sgt_hulka@yahoo.com http://www.hulka.com
Hulka Prediction:
================================================
Bandwidth will soon be a commodity and traded on the stock exchange.
#38 by "L0cksm1th"
2000-06-18 17:10:07
l0cksm1th@rocketjump.co.uk http://www.rocketjump.co.uk
Okay so Walnut Creek have had a lot of 'consumers' using their services (I'm talking about you & me, not Gamespy and the ilk) and they've realised they could start making some real money, now that they are so popular.

Walnut Creek have been providing a great service and if every ftp hosting service asked for money, I'd be inclined to go with them.

Until then, there will be many other services who will pick up because of their 'change of policy'.  They will become more noticed until, they too have become big enough for money to change hands.

Who knows, this kind of service may end up linked to your isp.  A different company depending on who you are and who your isp is.  Sounds good to me.

The fact is, the internet connected population is growing by 50% every 6 months (or something, they are growing) and eventually there will be so many that everything will become quite cheap and at the same time, companies providing internet based services will still prosper - depending on who provides the better service.

Sorry for the rant but it sounds pretty fair to me :)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#39 by "L0cksm1th"
2000-06-18 17:11:12
l0cksm1th@rocketjump.co.uk http://www.rocketjump.co.uk
Forgot to add, Gamespy should feel free to switch companies.  They should do it with dignity tho :p<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#40 by "Podfish"
2000-06-18 17:17:25
llama@verbalchilli.com http://www.verbalchilli.com
Vengeance[CoD]: "I agree totally. We really shouldn't be involved in any wars that don't impact our great country. We can't be everyones peace keepers. We always bail out other countries at the expence of ourselves when we have no real interest in it ourselves."

Tikki God: "Do you know how many billions of dollars we give to all these shitty foreign countries?"

I really, really wish you guys were being sarcastic, but I don't suppose you are. "All these shitty foreign countries" indeed. I mean, for christ's sake, haven't you heard of humanitarianism? That we should give a helping hand? That should make things better if possible, even at our own expense?

Think how seriously buggered the world would be if the Americans, Canadians and Australians hadn't involved themselves in the 2 world wars, despite the fact they lived a little further away. Oh and your example of Iraq??!?! The only reason any of the western countries did get involved was to look out for number one. Their oil was at stake. Then as soon as the oil was secured they buggered off, leaving the remaining forces to brutally supress and butcher their own civilians, who had supported the western involvement.

Grr...
#41 by "Podfish"
2000-06-18 17:17:55
llama@verbalchilli.com http://www.verbalchilli.com
Feck! Sorry, I posted in the wrong goddamn window.
#42 by "Ouroboros"
2000-06-18 17:23:31
ouroboros@volitionwatch.com http://descent.gamestats.com
I'll just state my viewpoint and be done with it. First, 3DRealms and Epic are rather large companies who should be doing their own hosting of files. Second, I do get mad at this. Not because of the lost space for demos and whatnot - dozens of mirrors are always available for them. What I see as the loss is that literally hundreds, if not thousands, of user-made mods were available only through CDROM.COM because their creators couldn't get space anywhere else. That's the thing that angers me, ladies and gentlemen. All that will be lost, and nobody's in a position to do all that massive hosting, unless gamespy wants to start losing money left and right on fileplanet.
#43 by "Pete Closs"
2000-06-18 17:54:48
It was only matter of time before they decided to charge. I'm amazed they didn't do it sooner and I can't say I blame them. Weren't they relying on download compilation CDs to make money?<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#44 by "Pete Closs"
2000-06-18 18:07:02
<b>#4</b> "Andy" wrote...
<QUOTE>Yep, the more I think about this, the more it tickles me. The new cdrom.com owners have made the right decision, and personally I think it's funny to see GameSpy getting upset about it. They've had it coming for ages, it's just happened at a rather inconvenient time. </QUOTE>

Gamespy complaining does seem rather rich to me. They took cdrom.com for granted and are now stroppy they don't get free bandwidth anymore. The words "tough luck" and "deal with it" spring to mind. Maybe they should spend all that ad money on upgrading their FTP to cope or simply pay cdrom.com instead of complaining. Their comment about "seeking to monetize the services" is a bit rich too comming from what started as a heavily commercialised Quake fan site.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#45 by "Pete Closs"
2000-06-18 18:11:10
<b>#17</b> "Fortyseven[BTEG]" wrote...
<QUOTE>

How many people, when they saw the topic title, thought this was going to be an Ion Storm/Killcreek subject? :)

<I>[raises hand]</I></QUOTE>

Hehe. [raises hand also] I somehow thought it was possibly a play on "Up the Duff" which means pregnant in the UK. Now there is a scary thought. :)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#46 by "Eric T. Cheng"
2000-06-18 22:21:52
erictcheng@hotmail.com
Gamespy used to be GSI, an ISP. You think THEY would have the bandwidth to host all those files.
#47 by "Eric T. Cheng"
2000-06-18 22:22:26
erictcheng@hotmail.com
<i>Thinking...</i>
#48 by "Snord"
2000-06-18 22:31:34
<b>#46</b> "Eric T. Cheng" wrote...
<QUOTE>


Gamespy used to be GSI, an ISP. You
think THEY would have the bandwidth to host all those files. </QUOTE>

Actually, i think they were Critical Mass or something.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#49 by "RzE"
2000-06-18 22:45:25
rze@counter-strike.net http://csnation.counter-strike.net
I worked on a PHL hosted site last september..

Well, guess how we mirrored files.

We uploaded it to a directory called '/cdrom/', which was, i assume, a virtual directory that uploads to the cdrom server and then mirrors it...

back on topic, I always wondered why CDROM did mirror for free, but it was a valuable service.. In the end, I wouldn't expect one site in their right mind to pay for CDROM.com mirroring.. period..

Here's the full e-mail, with some edits for GSpy's privacy:
--------------------------------------
Howdy, folks!

Some sad news today, as long-time partners CDROM.com informed us that they
will no longer be mirroring our files.  They have been partners for a number
of years, helping us to spread gaming goodness around the globe.  

Several months ago Digital River acquired Walnut Creek and have changed
their business model.  Rather than providing the free mirroring services
CDROM offered numerous sites in the past (3DRealms, GameSpy, id Software,
3DFiles, Epic, and others), Digital Rivers is seeking to monetize the
services.  It's an interesting turn of events, as one of the oldest gaming
file repositories on the 'net leaves the past behind and sets off in a new
direction.

How does this affect you and your site on the GameSpy Network?  If you're
currently using the "dl.asp method" of making your files available, the
change should be fairly transparent.  Your mirror list will be a little bit
shorter, but you won't be required to make any changes to your HTML.  (For
more information about making your files available via FilePlanet, check out
the Intranet: (url)

If you link directly to CDROM your older files will remain available - for
the time being - though no new files can be added.  We aren't sure of what
their plans for the existing archive are - they may or may not continue to
house it.  Be aware of the change and be ready in case the archive
disappears!

Things may seem a little gloomy, but just as one partnership ends another
begins!  Netline Internet Solutions (http://www.netlineis.com/) have
recently come on board, mirroring the whole enchilada.  They're located in
New York (Long Island, to be exact) and have a mighty phat pipe now serving
up your files.  We've also brought another FTP server of our own on-line (in
Sunny SoCal) so folks in the US should be able to take their pick from FTP
servers on either Coast!

Netline aren't the only ones coming on board...  we're looking to bring on
addition mirrors with our new friends at GameLoft, beginning with a mirror
in France.  We've already started mirroring game demos and patches in Italy
(NetGamers Italia, http://www.ngi.it/) and Australia (Global Info-Links,
http://gil.com.au/).  

If you know of an ISP that might be interested in joining the family, pass
this URL on to them.  http://www.fileplanet.com/index.asp?page=mirror  We're
always looking for folks with a little bandwidth to spare ;-)

So, wish CDROM.com a fond farewell and welcome our new partners on board!

Todd 'Tungsten' Northcutt
 You can trust the little green men.
 http://www.gamespy.com
#50 by "Paul"
2000-06-18 23:10:11
pab05f@mizzou.edu http://www.planethalflife.com/aerotic
I am quite sure the people at gamespy(as well as 3d Realms) have been grateful for all the good services cdrom has put forth to this community.

You can pick and choose all you want, but the bottom line is the letter sent out by gamespy was direct, and correct. That's how I felt a few days ago when I received it, and that's how I feel after reading this article.

As far as Joost Schuur is concerned, back a few years he helped me greatly in concerns with some planetquake network difficulty. I don't know him that well, but from what I do, he is an incredibly dedicated worker, and a fairly pleasant person.

As far as a real topic is concerned, "what ever happened to Dopefish?, and where is Ritual's Janitor?"

- paul
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Up The Creek

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
P O S T   A   C O M M E N T

You need to be logged in to post a comment here. If you don't have an account yet, you can create one here. Registration is free.
C R A P T A G S
Simple formatting: [b]bold[/b], [i]italic[/i], [u]underline[/u]
Web Links: [url=www.mans.de]Cool Site[/url], [url]www.mans.de[/url]
Email Links: [email=some@email.com]Email me[/email], [email]some@email.com[/email]
Simple formatting: Quoted text: [quote]Yadda yadda[/quote]
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (1) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details]