I've had the pleasure of chatting directly with [MENTION=4285]mordentral[/MENTION] and [MENTION=43786]Bioblaze[/MENTION] via Discord, but I'll still write the replies as it the information may be of interest to anyone.
If anyone else wishes to contact me directly, I will do my best to reply to PMs both on the forum and on Discord, where you can find me as "Vlad".
Originally posted by Stormtiger
View Post
The short answer to your question is that it won't be too easy to switch from the OnlineSubsystem framework to the raw framework exposed by UWorks so your assumption was correct. Generally, if someone is just starting to implement online features, I wouldn't expect them to have any difficulty at all when working with UWorks vs. working with OnlineSubsystem's. It's only a slight difference in workflows. Unfortunately, your particular case is that you have already implemented online features. However, a few days ago, Mordentral was kind enough to suggest encapsulating UWorks in its own OnlineSubsystem (OnlineSubsystemUWorks maybe?). Neither I nor my friend thought of this and it's obvious that it's a great suggestion and, as such, we'll implement a separate module for it in the near future.
I don't have any plans regarding PSN in either way. The reason is simply that I'm not sure what I'm allowed to do and what not, from a legal perspective.
Lastly, Get/Set Player Stats demo it is then! We'll try to implement demos with nice, minimal-styled interfaces. Thanks!
Originally posted by Bioblaze
View Post
[1] - This is the only entry in your list which we wanted to sell as part of a separate bundle (which also includes the plugin itself, of course) for an extra 20-30E. We have several projects in mind which would make use of this plugin and these represent the main reason why we are willing to sell this plugin for a lower price than expected (the only "semi-similar" plugin that we know is available on the MP is ExtendedOnlineSubsystemFacebook, priced at 144E; UWorks has been submitted for 80E, based on the poll). However, if there are several requests for this, we'll consider offering it out-of-the-box!
[2] - Thanks again for your suggestions regarding this point! As mentioned in private, inventory is the only interface which we haven't tested at all. We'll change that!
[3] - Will do!
[4] - We're offering a library with utilities for our users to interact with various data from Steamworks, SteamIDs and GameIDs being among them. We don't expose 64-bit forms of SteamIDs or GameIDs. We do all the conversions in the back, in both ways (SteamID->Steam64 and Steam64->SteamID) so our customers don't have to! The demo for this library will surely be included out-of-the-box!
[5] - This is also definitely going to be there out-of-the-box (maybe not exactly when the plugin hits the marketplace, but very soon after; a minimal UI might be required). In the demo, this is where I start talking about server registration: https://youtu.be/uGPoHWtcWiU?t=482 . Earlier, I had shown how to grab an individual server's IP:GamePort. The simplest way to achieve connection is simply to combine the two using "open IP:Port". Indeed, as discussed, I agree there are ways to further simplify and improve this process, but I don't have my mind set on any simplification in particular at the moment, apart from the encapsulation within the OnlineSubsystem framework.
Whenever you're ready, hit me with more

Originally posted by Kris
View Post
Originally posted by mordentral
View Post
For me, the most annoying thing about the current implementation of Steamworks, via OnlineSubsystemSteam, was the difficulty in creating a simple dedicated server. The absence and/or bugs of several social features come on a very close second. That's why the 2 were our starting points for this plugin.
Leave a comment: