We believe that P2P Technology offers a number of compelling benefits to game developers, publishers, and even consumers. Implementing the following best practices will help to foster a better understanding of the technology and the numerous advantages which it can provide.

The confidence with respect to the use and deployment of P2P Technology will be advanced by demonstrating consideration for game consumers through three simple directives:

1. Transparency – Make visible and readily accessible information about the presence and operational activity of the P2P technology.
2. Control – Provide the ability to manage, operate and remove the P2P technology in an intuitive and conspicuous manner to the user.
3. Privacy – Ensure the absolute privacy and security of personal information and user originated files.

Recommended Best Practices for Using P2P Technology with Games

1. During the installation of an application that utilizes P2P Technology to download a Game, Game Update, and/or User-Originated Game Content:
   a. Inform the user in a clear and conspicuous manner that P2P Technology is being installed on the user’s system;
   b. Make readily available a plain language explanation of the relevant functionality of the P2P Technology that may materially affect their system resources and/or data; and
   c. If any game files will be redistributed to other users after their installation and incorporation into the game, then disclose this behavior to users in a clear and conspicuous manner.
2. Provide a conspicuous, intuitive interface that indicates when the P2P Technology is operating, such as by displaying a system tray icon, in the task bar and/or within the game interface and clearly disclosing if delivery of an Update via P2P Technology will occur after the game closes.
3. Provide users with a clear and conspicuous way to disable the P2P Technology at any time either by closing the application or via a control accessible from within the application’s main user interface. Ensure that the operational settings that govern the P2P Technology, once set by the user to reflect their preferences, persist as desired by the user through system logout, shutdown, startup or restart.
4. Never enable other users to access any files or directories other than those necessary to the games, updates, and/or user-originated game content being distributed by the P2P technology. The P2P Technology must not permit the distribution of other user-originated files.
5. Notify the user if any of the user’s personally identifiable information (PII) provided in conjunction with the operation of the P2P Technology will be shared with any outside parties. Obtain consent from the user before any such activity begins.
6. Ensure that complete removal of the P2P Technology is simple to do and explained in plain language.

Download the Best Practices for Using P2P Technology with Online Games (PDF format). You can also download: How Solid State Networks Complies with Best Practices for P2P Technology in Game Delivery (PDF format) to see how our products implement these directives.

Click here to learn more about our position on P2P technology and its implementation with online games and patches.

P2P Best Practices for Games is a post from: Solid State Networks

As an early developer of commercial P2P solutions for games, Solid State Networks has often had to work to educate customers, partners and regulators about how the technology actually works, how it can/should be implemented, etc. Still, “P2P technology” is commonly confused with the attributes of its implementation which can, in turn, result in unintended consequences. This happened in 2009 when the U.S. House of Representatives introduced HR 1319, a bill also known as the “Informed P2P User Act”.

This bill, as originally introduced, would have required all P2P applications to comply with a restrictive set of rules for the stated purpose of preventing the inadvertent sharing of personally identifiable information (PII) by any user of any P2P network. At the time, we thought a more appropriate name for this bill would have been The Uninformed P2P User Act.

Fortunately, through the tireless efforts of the Distributed Computing Industry Association (DCIA), led by its CEO Marty Lafferty, along with input from key DCIA members including Solid State Networks, subsequent drafts of the bill included language that excludes certain P2P implementations that are clearly not capable of sharing PII. These applications, such as those used for content delivery, serve a very different function than the file-sharing applications that have motivated the bill’s sponsors to pursue this legislation. As a result of the efforts from the DCIA and Congressional and FTC staff, commercial P2P delivery solutions will not be unduly impacted by H.R. 1319 should the bill (which has since passed in the House) become law.

HR 1319 was indeed a close call and should be something of a wake-up call for both P2P vendors and the game publishers that benefit from P2P technology. Game publishers, whether you are using a commercial P2P solution or rolling your own P2P implementation, should be on the lookout for things that might impact your ability to utilize P2P technology in the future. There are still many open questions with respect to the use of P2P technology for game delivery (or any type of content files) to and among consumers that need to be understood for P2P to mature as a widely adopted consumer technology, such as:

• Who owns the resources that power a P2P network? Who has the right to use these resources?
• How can a player’s resources be controlled and used? How should they be used?
• How are decisions made concerning the use of these resources? Who should make those decisions?
• What role should players have in how their resources are utilized?
• What are all of the benefits of P2P? How are those benefits distributed among publishers, P2P vendors and players?
• What are the costs of P2P? How are those costs distributed among publishers, P2P vendors and players?
• What are the requirements for disclosure? Are the minimum legal requirements enough?
• What risks and potential liabilities are associated with implementing P2P for game delivery? How can those risks be mitigated?

Today, Solid State Networks is publishing the first edition of The Game Publisher’s Guide to P2P Delivery. This guide is designed to help you understand P2P technologies and their various implementations so that you can formulate your own answers to these questions. We will be updating this document as necessary to reflect changes in the technology and in the games industry. To get the document, use this simple request form and we’ll email you a link to it.

In conjunction with the release of the Publisher’s Guide, we are also publishing our own Best Practices for P2P Delivery with Online Games. These Best Practices represent our belief in the core values of transparency, control and privacy—directives which should be adopted by publishers who value long-term relationships with players.

The Best Practices also follow the concept of User Engagement: A Simple and Intuitive Peer Participation Policy.

Yes, we develop software for P2P game delivery, but we are gamers, too. We hope that our efforts to inform and educate the game community will result in a constructive industry discussion that ultimately promotes the continued adoption of P2P technologies by game publishers, trust of the technology among gamers and the avoidance of impediments often caused by legislated regulation.

We welcome any and all input from publishers, gamers, developers and other commercial P2P solution providers. If you have a comment or question please let us know using the comments section below:

The Future of P2P in Game Delivery: Pillar or Pariah? is a post from: Solid State Networks

Use these quick links to learn more about our stance on the topic of P2P implementation for online games, our recommended best practices and more:

• User Engagement: A Simple and Intuitive P2P Participation Policy (Blog post from Solid State Networks CEO Rick Buonincontri)
• The Future of P2P in Game Delivery: Pillar or Pariah? (Blog post from Solid State Networks CEO Rick Buonincontri)
• P2P Best Practices (main page)
• P2P Best Practices-related posts.

GAME PUBLISHERS: Use the form below to request a copy of The Game Publisher’s Guide to P2P Delivery (PDF format). This white paper describes P2P technology, including the most common P2P network types and client types, as well as various P2P implementations. This guide was designed to help you consider the best implementations for your games so that both you and your players will experience maximum benefits. We also welcome your comments.

PSA Video: Playing Fair with P2P is a post from: Solid State Networks

We at Solid State Networks have been steadfast in our belief that user experience (“UX”) should be the highest priority when developing the types of content delivery solutions that we develop.

UX in the context of software applications is primarily associated with the user’s perception of usability. At Solid State, our concept of providing a quality UX also includes transparency to the user (we mean transparency in the human sense and not as typically used with computing).

An application’s UX goes well beyond the user’s immediate perception and extends throughout the many ways that a user may be impacted by the application. Therefore, we strive to make applications that any user can control easily and intuitively, even if they do not completely comprehend all that they are controlling.

We believe that transparency is especially important with P2P applications. P2P can provide a benefit to publishers and consumers alike, but at the end of the day, the resources used in P2P belong to the user and not to a publisher or P2P vendor.

We decided long ago that we should be able to clearly communicate to users when, how and why they would (or would not) be a participant in a P2P network. Yet, we do not want to encumber users with complex rules and instructions.

Ideally, as gamers, we would like to see that all publishers provide users the ability to opt out of a P2P network. However, we also think it is acceptable for a publisher to require players’ participation in the P2P network, especially when the content delivered is free to users, such as in a free-to-play game. That said, it seems obvious (to us, anyway) that requiring P2P participation comes with the responsibility that publishers and vendors provide an indication that there is a P2P application running along with easily accessible controls to disable it.

Central to our own ideas around a user’s P2P participation is the state of that user’s engagement with the publisher. For example, if a player is downloading a game, that player may be required to participate in a P2P network. When that player then makes a disengaging action (i.e., by closing the download or game application) then that user should also be removed from the P2P network for that publisher’s content. Why? Because once that player has disengaged and moved on to something else (say, watching a video on YouTube or just walking away from their system) then it is reasonable for them to believe that they have concluded their business with that publisher. If, at that time, the publisher would like to continue to utilize that user’s resources then the user should be asked for permission to do so.

To us, employing a P2P participation policy that is based on user engagement is fair, transparent and respectful to the user that is ultimately contributing their resources to the network. Additionally, it minimizes any risk of users that may not be aware of the implications of P2P uploading and the impact it may have on the performance of other devices using that Internet connection. Perhaps more importantly, it may avert unplanned consumption of Internet usage, particularly for users that are on limited usage plans that may be required to pay overage fees.

- Rick Buonincontri, CEO, Solid State Networks

Related Links:
Main P2P Best Practices Page
Responsible Use of P2P Technology in Games (video)
More P2P Best Practices News and Blogs

User Engagement: A Simple and Intuitive P2P Participation Policy is a post from: Solid State Networks

New Features & Improvements

• Fully featured command line client supporting all functions and rules that are supported by the GUI client
• Added the ability to deploy to the local/network file system for ease of integration with R-Synch or FTP Client of choice
• Parallelized the patch building process to run across multiple CPU’s for each release permutation
• Added support for Multiple Package Lists per Product
• Exposed X-Delta configuration via the Command Client

Bugs & Known Issues Squashed
Fixed locked file issue in rollback process.

Publisher.Direct 2.0.10

New Features & Improvements

• Added “tab” key support
• Removed browse for folder from Launcher API
• Added Launcher initialized event to Launcher API
• Change image format and config setting for StencilBitmap to StencilImage in Launcher (now supports PNG instead of BMP to save space)
• Increase length of tokenizer buffer to allow for longer parameters in Javascript
• Improvements made to traffic shaping to allow for intelligent bursting
• Removed check for deleting temp directory during progressive packages
• Changed SSN javascript to shut-down in the event of a fatal error (rather than leave a dead launcher open)
• Added support for “Check for Update” when Launcher left open

Bugs & Known Issues Squashed

• Fixed deadlock on free space error
• Fixed source file deletion during expansion process
• Properly delete orphaned directories in temp

2.0.10 Release Notes is a post from: Solid State Networks

• Added selective Windows elevation.
• Removed Microsoft Foundation Class (MFC) dependency from Publisher.Direct Launcher.
• Consolidation of FFS file(s) functionality to one FFS file.
• Added web browser security manager.
• Eliminated the need to enable Active Scripting in IE.
• Expanded Solid.Direct API
• Added ability to customize Launcher.Config.
• Added ability to customize Launcher.Settings.
• Improved Error Messaging.
• Logging improved and made optional.
• Download and Patching callback timing reduced for better UI response.
• Added per-pixel overlay to Solid.Direct Launcher – allowing for drop shadows and other effects.
• Reduced CPU load during Peer Enabled Delivery.
• Per Byte progress bars
• New Sample Launcher
• Added Optional Patch options to Sample Launcher.
• Updated CORE to latest version

Patch Assistant New Features & Improvements

• Removed “.deploy” from file extensions.
• Upgraded content injection library to include files sizes when deploying to DDN.

Bugs Squashed

• Fixed process launch argument issue.
• Eliminated uninstaller infinite loops.
• Improved window layer rendering in Windows 7/Vista.
• Server options race condition abated.
• Increased javascript length limit on pre/post process commands from 300 char to 4k.
• Fixed issue with Download Completion text exceeding 100%
• Updated API version text in logs.

2.0.9.6 Release Notes is a post from: Solid State Networks

BROOMFIELD, Colo., June 1, 2010 – Level 3 Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: LVLT) today announced its work with Austin, Tx.-based UTV True Games (www.truegames.com), an international pure-play online game publisher for massive multi-player online games (MMOGs), to provide content delivery network (CDN) services and advanced reporting analytics to support UTV True Games’ MMOG game titles.

Under the terms of the agreement, UTV True Games will leverage both Level 3’s CDN services and game publishing software from Solid State Networks, a Level 3 Solutions Partner. Solid State Networks will provide its integrated game publishing solution alongside Level 3’s caching and download services, origin storage, and Content Analytics reporting service.

“We’ve been impressed by both the quality of the service as well as the level of responsiveness and collaboration we’ve experienced with Level 3 and Solid State Networks,” said Mick Giles, chief technology officer for UTV True Games. “With the insight the companies have provided, we’ve significantly improved our download process over the past year to our players’ benefit.”

Level 3 and Solid State Networks offer game delivery solutions for developers and publishers designed to increase player conversion and retention, improve operational efficiency, and provide actionable reporting metrics.

Level 3 and Solid State Networks have been working with UTV True Games to support the company’s Warrior Epic MMOG title (www.WarriorEpic.com) and the upcoming launch of the Mytheon game (www.MytheonGame.com), currently in beta. By examining the extensive metrics provided by both companies, UTV True Games was able to identify areas for improvement in its download experience and make adjustments to its process, thereby increasing the number of successful game downloads.

“This is a great example of the benefit of the solutions Level 3 and Solid State Networks provide to meet the specific needs of live game operators,” said Peter Neill, senior vice president of Content Markets at Level 3.”UTV True Games has access to a high level of actionable reporting metrics and – just as importantly – the support of a team that understands online game publishers’ requirements and can help implement new and better solutions for their business.”

For more information on Level 3’s media delivery services and the integrated solution Level 3 and Solid State Networks provide, please visit www.Level3delivers.com.

For more information on Solid State Networks software solutions, visit: www.solidstatenetworks.com

About Level 3 Communications
Level 3 Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: LVLT) is a leading international provider of fiber-based communications services. Enterprise, content, wholesale and government customers rely on Level 3 to deliver services with an industry-leading combination of scalability and value over an end-to-end fiber network. Level 3 offers a portfolio of metro and long-haul services, including transport, data, Internet, content delivery and voice. For more information, visit www.Level3.com.

© Level 3 Communications, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Level 3, Vyvx, Level 3 Communications and the Level 3 Communications Logo are either registered service marks or service marks of Level 3 Communications, LLC and/or one of its Affiliates in the United States and/or other countries. Level 3 services are provided by wholly owned subsidiaries of Level 3 Communications, Inc. Any other service names, product names, company names or logos included herein are the trademarks or service marks of their respective owners.

Forward-Looking Statement
Some of the statements made in this press release are forward looking in nature. These statements are based on management’s current expectations or beliefs. These forward looking statements are not a guarantee of performance and are subject to a number of uncertainties and other factors, many of which are outside Level 3’s control, which could cause actual events to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the statements. The most important factors that could prevent Level 3 from achieving its stated goals include, but are not limited to, the current uncertainty in the global financial markets and the global economy; disruptions in the financial markets that could affect Level 3’s ability to obtain additional financing; as well as the company’s ability to: increase and maintain the volume of traffic on the network; successfully integrate acquisitions; develop effective business support systems; defend intellectual property and proprietary rights; manage system and network failures or disruptions; develop new services that meet customer demands and generate acceptable margins; adapt to rapid technological changes that lead to further competition; attract and retain qualified management and other personnel; and meet all of the terms and conditions of debt obligations. Additional information concerning these and other important factors can be found within Level 3’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Statements in this press release should be evaluated in light of these important factors. Level 3 is under no obligation to, and expressly disclaims any such obligation to, update or alter its forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise.

###

Contact Information

Media: Investors:
Alexis Hammack Mark Stoutenberg
720-888-2441 720-888-2518

Level 3 and Solid State Networks Support UTV True Games is a post from: Solid State Networks

• Added selective Windows elevation.
• Removed “.deploy” from file extensions.
• Removed Microsoft Foundation Class (MFC) dependency from Publisher.Direct Launcher.
• Added web browser security manager.
• Eliminated the need to enable Active Scripting in IE.
• Expanded Solid.Direct API
  • Added ability to customize Launcher.Config.
  • Added ability to customize Launcher.Settings.
  • Improved Error Messaging.
  • Logging improved and made optional.
  • Download and Patching callback timing reduced for better UI response.
• Added per-pixel overlay to Solid.Direct Launcher – allowing for drop shadows and other effects.
• Reduced CPU load during Peer Enabled Delivery.

Bugs Squashed

• Fixed process launch argument issue.
• Eliminated uninstaller infinite loops.
• Improved window layer rendering in Windows 7/Vista.
• Server options race condition abated.

Version 2.0.9.* is a post from: Solid State Networks

CURRENT

DIRECT

SOLO

Patch Assistant

On YouTube? Subscribe to: solidgamepublishing to get the latest product demos and walk-through videos from Solid State Networks.

Watch our product videos is a post from: Solid State Networks

To schedule a meeting with us at GDC, please click here to contact us.

2010 Game Developers Conference is a post from: Solid State Networks