The New WGC Launcher

[Skpstr]

On Friday, August 03, 2018 at 11:43 AM, oldiowaguy said:

I'm glad to hear you speak for the whole WoWs community. Technology changes, whether a person embraces it or not is up to them. I guess we could all be driving Model A Fords yet, too.

That's a bit exaggerative.

More apropos would be to say you don't want a self-driving car.

I'll tell you right now, the newest car I'll ever own is the last one they make without that crap.

I am also disappointed that where a standard transmission was both fun and economical, now you typically have to pay extra to get it.

 

[Retnav54]

KSN, for myself, thanks for all your efforts and input on this. You've been an objective and calm voice of reason amidst some of the screeching going on. It's just that, sadly once again, it has to be the playerbase, and not WG itself, that has to be out in front on a contentious issue and find some kind of resolution.

As far as the issues I raised, concerning security - I do agree with you, data mining doesn't fit WG's business model (then again, it didn't fit Facebook's either...). And while it might sound somewhat condescending, frankly, from what I've seen of WG over the past 5 years, I get the feeling that they really wouldn't have the expertise in-house to successfully pull it off.

But, if WG outsourced the development of the original version of the WGC to a third party, and said third party was less than scrupulous, including some backdoors in the WGC, such that they could take advantage of WG and it's customer base, by doing some data mining of their own..... I'm willing to take WG at their word, that their only intent as far as data collection was configuration data on their customer's PC's - that falls right in line with their business model. But if they did outsource the original development to a third party, I can find it quite within the realm of possibility that said third party's intent was anything but honorable.

Given what Landedkiller has reported of his experiences with the original version of WGC, finding multiple connections still open even when WGC was shut down, and the number of other posters reporting problems with WGC triggering malware/antivirus programs, one even that his ISP interpreted WGC as a DDOS event and shut off his internet access for a period of time - even though this was with the original version of WGC, I'm not willing to dismiss any security concerns out of hand just yet.

What would lay most of my concerns to rest, is if someone was able to replicate Landedkiller's experiment with the latest version of WGC, and verify that the issues he and others reported with the original version have been corrected by WG - no multiple unidentified outgoing connections whether the program is active or closed, no problems regarding security/malware/antivirus programs except for the occasional "false positive" due to hardware and software configs, the only data collection or outgoing connection being for what WG has stated, PC configuration data only for their use.

All I'm asking is, show me enough credible evidence to convince me that WG has corrected these issues, that my data and computer won't be at undue risk, and I won't give one whit whether or not WG implements the WGC.
 

[DrHolmes52]

11 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

That's a bit exaggerative.

More apropos would be to say you don't want a self-driving car.

I'll tell you right now, the newest car I'll ever own is the last one they make without that crap.

I am also disappointed that where a standard transmission was both fun and economical, now you typically have to pay extra to get it.

 

I'm kind of with you.

But WGC is all I've ever used, so I don't have a comparison.

And so much of my work software craps all over my other work software, that I used to having to shut them off when trying to use a different one.

[Radar_X]

9 minutes ago, Retnav54 said:

But, if WG outsourced the development of the original version of the WGC to a third party, and said third party was less than scrupulous, including some backdoors in the WGC, such that they could take advantage of WG and it's customer base, by doing some data mining of their own..... I'm willing to take WG at their word, that their only intent as far as data collection was configuration data on their customer's PC's - that falls right in line with their business model. But if they did outsource the original development to a third party, I can find it quite within the realm of possibility that said third party's intent was anything but honorable.

 

The WGC was developed by our Platform team in house and has been iterated over the last few years. 

[Retnav54]

Radar_X, thank you for your reply and input. As I've already said, my ONLY concern with the WGC is the potential security issues raised here, by other's experience with the original version of the WGC. My offer above still stands - show me enough credible evidence to convince me, that with the latest version of the WGC, that those concerns are now unfounded, and I'll have no issue whatsoever with using the WGC when it goes live, and continuing my association with WG.

 

[Amenhir]

On 8/3/2018 at 7:50 AM, _Kiss_The_Donkey said:

WG Game center launcher has been an unstable bug infested resource hog from day one. The ONLY reason they are pushing this is to try to get more players to play other games...FYI WG...I don't want to play your other games. Not gonna happen.  The negatives FAR outweigh the positives with this uni launcher.  When this launcher messes up players do not play . They are more tempted to give up and say screw this than mess around trying to get it tot work.  New players might get sucked in...the players from your other games that are FORCED to use the launcher will use it of course, but chances are those players are not the core group you want playing WOWS. If your intention is to start killing your own game, and at this 4 yr or so mark its probably going to go that way, R.I.P. 

What a resource hog.  I can't believe my computer even functions with all that memory and cpu it's hogging.

[Amenhir]

On 8/3/2018 at 7:50 AM, _Kiss_The_Donkey said:

delete double post

[DrHolmes52]

3 minutes ago, Amenhir said:

What a resource hog.  I can't believe my computer even functions with all that memory and cpu it's hogging.

You probably used more with your web browser when you posted this.

[YeOldeTraveller]

Currently testing the new Game Center.

I'll update this item as I work through the process.

Testing complete.

Findings:

Multiple installers:

You get a different installer if you click on the link in the News Article as opposed to the link under Download Game.  (The behavior is reported as different.)

Download Game will get you a file, world_of_warships_install_na_bnej27f1smvy.exe (the string at the end could be different for different users), that is 6,309 KB in size. (Don't use this one, per other reports you get no options)
Install Game Center in the recent article will get you a file, wargaming_game_center_install_na_bnej27f1smvy.exe, that is 4,589 KB in size. (My initial tests will be with this installer.)

This was already reported above with details in the WGC Feedback thread.  I'm just including it here for completeness and independent confirmation.

Installer supports alternate installation directory

Installer has an option to create a Desktop icon

Game Center on first launch finds and prompts for already-installed games.

For me this was WoWS and the WoWS PT.  It is called Import.  I did this and was quickly notified that each had been updated to the current versions.

Game Center has all the settings I mentioned previously as important including whether to start on boot, update automatically, or seed other systems.

I will be rebooting shortly, but These match the current options with respect to the Classic Launcher (to use WG term for it).

You also have the same ability to tailor the network speeds as the current launcher.

After reboot, Game Center was not running.

Resources used when logged in, but not in any game:

Practically no CPU, 192 MB Working Set

Connections after login

92.223.96.96 (na.a.gcdn.co) (G-Core Labs, content delivery for the games and entertainment industry)
162.213.61.102 (No reverse DNS, but the IP range is assigned to Wargaming America Inc.)
162.213.62.86 (sv4-v-a86.fe.core.pw)  (G-Core Labs, content delivery for the games and entertainment industry)
162.213.62.106 (sv4-v-a106.fe.core.pw)
162.213.63.149 (sv4-v-b149.fe.core.pw)
162.216.230.15 (dc11-v-a15.fe.core.pw)
216.58.192.174 (ord36s02-in-f174.1e100.net.) (Google, could be anything from analytics to content delivery)

You have to accept the EULA twice

Once in the Game Center before it launches the Client, and then again for the Client itself.

This is true even for installations that had already previously accepted the EULA before installing Game Center.

Game Center doesn't act differently when a game is running

While Game Center knows that a game is running, it does not seem to alter its behavior in any way.

It does not minimize.  Minimizing doesn't seem to do anything but remove the window for the Desktop, so this doesn't hurt/help.

It maintains, and can initiate, connections while the Client is running.  This is likely the largest remaining concern.  There is no indication that Game Center will defer updates for any installed games while you are actually playing one of them.  I do not know that it doesn't defer, but this is unclear.  Updating the current game is unlikely to happen, but updating another game could be disruptive.

@KSN pointed out that automatic updates can be disabled.  This will need to be verified, but if confirmed, this is good enough for the connections issue. (Once confirmed, I will have no technical issues left regarding WGC for me on my computer.) 

Handling of NA Live Server and Public Test Server is reasonable

Connection to the Live server if logged into the Game Center is direct.

1. Click Play
2. You are presented with all the screens as before, but you do not need to interact with any of them

Connection to the Public Test Server is basically the same as before

1. Select PT as the Game Instance (it is a drop down)
2. Click Play
3. You see the loading screen
4. At the login screen, click Connect (I already of the token.  I expect this would just be a provide email and password if you don't have the token saved.)

There is no way to stop Game Center within the app

Clicking the X on the window removed the window from the Desktop and from the Task Bar.

There is an icon in the System Tray.  From here, you can get a menu with Exit as an option.  This will cause the Game Center to exit.  You do not have to kill it in Task Manager.

WGC uses P2P/torrent method for Updates

This is an efficient and legitimate method for distributing data to a large audience.

Some ISPs block this type of download, or significantly restrict it.

Due to its nature, you will find many connections to a wide variety of locations while this download is in progress.  This can raise questions based on some of the remote ends of those connections.  Most of them should be players like us.  I cannot prove this is true for all connections, of course.

[Amenhir]

1 minute ago, DrHolmes52 said:

You probably used more with your web browser when you posted this.

Yes I did.  There is too much hyperbole being thrown around.

[Amenhir]

On 8/3/2018 at 10:54 AM, giovybez said:

I've mentioned it before, but when WG stops supporting the old launcher i will be unable to play the game anymore. WGC provides it's updates via P2P connections, it's basically a turrent. My ISP has restrictions on said connections. This is a very serious and real concern for me. I won't be able to recievce updates. I won't be able to play. I'll be stuck with 37 premium botes that I have purchased with real hard-earned money. There will be many others in the same predicament. I seriously hope there is a dev that comes through this post and sees the legitimacy of our concerns and the negative impact WGC will have on some players.  

Did you know that the "old launcher" uses p2p/torrents, unless you tell it not to?

[iDuckman]

18 hours ago, Amenhir said:

What I have gleaned from this thread is that a fair amount of players are gaming on toasters that use potatoes as batteries.

Yeah?  You got a problem with that, bub?

[TheTrickpony]

I already have a blizzard launcher and a steam launcher, one more isn’t gonna kill me. I downloaded it and will use it for wows exclusively and feed back issues and wait for the promised rewards for being a guinea pig and downloading it early. 

[TheOmegaDuck]

15 hours ago, Stormie1126 said:

I'm about to run out on premium time, for me, every little bit helps with the grind I'm trying to get through atm.

Yeah, that's just the problem with them - They're not great for grinding. They've only got the -3% detectability and the +4% dispersion.... I'd have no issue with the Anniversary Camo (Those benefits +100% XP) or anything else like it - The basketball camos just fall kind of flat in comparison

[Stormie1126]

10 minutes ago, TheOmegaDuck said:

Yeah, that's just the problem with them - They're not great for grinding. They've only got the -3% detectability and the +4% dispersion.... I'd have no issue with the Anniversary Camo (Those benefits +100% XP) or anything else like it - The basketball camos just fall kind of flat in comparison

What isn't? Did they announce what the bonus would be somewhere?

[TheOmegaDuck]

1 minute ago, Stormie1126 said:

What isn't? Did they announce what the bonus would be somewhere?

Nope, not yet. The 20 German layups was just my own doom and gloom at the likely possibility that this "Bonus" might be a tad lackluster.

[RagingxMarmoset]

20 hours ago, Soulcaller said:

What ever it is it's not worth handing over you identity to the inet ;)

If you think your information isn't already on the internet, you are tragically naive.

[Oldschool_Gaming_YT]

If one dont have time to read thru all 19 pages of this. What is the issue with the game launcher and why do players oppose it? I have used it since it came out and i dont see anything wrong with it?

[Cruxdei]

G-core labs?media business?

MOM I'M GONNA BE A TV STAR.

[YeOldeTraveller]

56 minutes ago, Oldschool_Gaming_YT said:

If one dont have time to read thru all 19 pages of this. What is the issue with the game launcher and why do players oppose it? I have used it since it came out and i dont see anything wrong with it?

The main issue is related to the initial launch.

Some users had significant (as in reinstall from the bare metal significant) problems.  These were real.  To make matters worse, there was no immediate ability to go back.  This was solved quickly, but it made perceptions worse.

Many people are resistant to change.  This is particularly true when the status quo ante is working.

Finally, being told there is no option and this it is for your own good triggered all the trust and related issues.

The Game Center provides limited advantages to the current player base (even less if they only play Warships), but it does improve the development and support situation related to the launcher for Wargaming.

I am of the opinion that if WG would have started by noting their gains in efficiency, and rolled it out slowly with strong support for those who hit issues, things would have been better.  There will still be those who prefer the old method.  For the record, I think Game Center will cost me a negligible amount of time and effort over the current launcher.

I like to have control over what is running on my system and when.  There were limited controls in the initial launch.  This was likely not a problem for most.  My testing shows that the current version meets my needs in terms of control.  It also really does adhere (to the limits of my testing) to the settings I have made.

I was going to make a separate post, but I will just put it here:

The current version of the Game Center works and can be configured to nearly match the operation of the Classic Launcher.  It isn't perfect, but there are acceptable (at least to me) workarounds for the remaining concerns.

I encourage all users to try it, and report any issues found so they can be addressed. WG cannot fix what they do not know about.

[anonym_Hf93Jbjm9WjT]

2 hours ago, Amenhir said:

Yes I did.  There is too much hyperbole being thrown around.

indeed, for that which is hyperbole.

Nevertheless, there are plenty of valid criticisms which are not hyperbole, not least, how it forces users to accept peer2peer, rather than direct download, thereby consuming our valuable and limited (if you are on a dsl sub), upload bandwidth, how it uploads information about your system to WG without your permission, how it fails to quit and remains active after client launch. None of rthese criticisms have acceptable responses, so far.

So for the majority, there is not hyperbole on the part of dectracters, as much as hyperbolic defense and praise from those who defend the WGC.

[Herr_Reitz]

47 minutes ago, DarthZeppelin said:

how it forces users to accept peer2peer, rather than direct download, thereby consuming our valuable and limited (if you are on a dsl sub), upload bandwidth, how it uploads information about your system to WG without your permission, how it fails to quit and remains active after client launch. None of rthese criticisms have acceptable responses, so far.

Interesting... most that stuff p2p in your face allow you to deny that operation. 

If they want our information (anonymous i read somewhere) then come on down, tell us exactly what you want, what you're gonna do with it internally and who you're gonna share it with. Personally, if it is truly anonymous, there's no reason not to tell us the details. Right? 

The idea some of you toss around suggesting people should buy new puters to play this game is ridiculous. You think the majority of their players in the homelands are driving high-end machines? 

[Wo_9]

I uninstalled the damn thing after looking at my taskbar and even uninstalling WGC was a pain the [edited].   I'm so glad i got rid of it and i'm never going back to that terrible software. 

[anonym_Hf93Jbjm9WjT]

8 minutes ago, Herr_Reitz said:

Interesting... most that stuff p2p in your face allow you to deny that operation. 

If they want our information (anonymous i read somewhere) then come on down, tell us exactly what you want, what you're gonna do with it internally and who you're gonna share it with. Personally, if it is truly anonymous, there's no reason not to tell us the details. Right? 

The idea some of you toss around suggesting people should buy new puters to play this game is ridiculous. You think the majority of their players in the homelands are driving high-end machines? 

+ end users are understandably skeptical/nervous in the aftermath of recent scandals involving the abuse of data/software by certain social media/ The onus is on WG to reassure, justify, and ask permission. Compensating or retreating as and when a user is unsatisfied. It is unreasonable for them to expect end users to respond in the naive accepting manner of 20 years ago, internet users have grown up since those wild west days.

[_GreyBeard_]

13 minutes ago, Herr_Reitz said:

Interesting... most that stuff p2p in your face allow you to deny that operation.

 

Except that the old launcher also used p2p for updates. The only good thing is that in both you can set the upload to zero, which in theory should limit the impact that it has when updating the game(s). Remains to be seen what will happen for those of us that have resisted the new launcher until the next game update. Probably still bring most peoples connection to its knees as it seems WG has no idea how to optimize whatever torrent client they are using for updates (even setting the upload in the old launcher can bring a connection to its knees when set to zero).