PC version now WORTHLESS. No mods OR dedicated servers!

#51 Posted by rateoforange (403 posts) -

What? Are you kidding me? Fuck COD, then. I didn't buy any of them before 4 and it looks like I won't have to buy any of them after.

#52 Posted by Mikemcn (7018 posts) -
@Kazona said:
" @Metal_Mills said:
" @natetodamax said:
"When you say there won't be any dedicated servers, does that mean that all matches will be hosted? That's dumb "
It'll be just like the console version. "
But if you can host the game on your console without problems, why couldn't you host it on your PC? Why does the PC side need dedicated servers, but consoles don't? "

Because you can install the game on a server in your house , and play on that server with a good connection, consoles cannot do that, thats why you console owners get so much more lag.  
 
and if this is true, im pirateing this game, they can all go to hell, pricks
#53 Posted by jakob187 (21757 posts) -

Personally, my mind is still spinning over the fact that Infinity Ward would HONESTLY ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN!!!  SERIOUSLY!!!

#54 Posted by Mikemcn (7018 posts) -
@jakob187 said:
"Personally, my mind is still spinning over the fact that Infinity Ward would HONESTLY ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN!!!  SERIOUSLY!!! "

If its true, SOMEONE POST A LINK FOR THE LOVE OF GOD. 
 
I bet IW is pissed about this, i'd say this is a good time for them to leave activision, they won't but i would think better of them if they did.
#55 Posted by zudthespud (3284 posts) -
@Kazona said:
" @Metal_Mills said:
" @natetodamax said:
"When you say there won't be any dedicated servers, does that mean that all matches will be hosted? That's dumb "
It'll be just like the console version. "
But if you can host the game on your console without problems, why couldn't you host it on your PC? Why does the PC side need dedicated servers, but consoles don't? "
You can't host the game on a console without any problems o_O have you played CoD 4 on a 360? It's mega laggy. PC dedicated servers are much, MUCH better.
#56 Posted by CaptainObvious (3000 posts) -

Wow..wtf. 
 
They've gone too far! No dedicated servers and server lists? Fuck you, Activision, i'm not buying your game. Who's with me? Are you Anti - Activision or Pro - Activision? 

#57 Edited by jakob187 (21757 posts) -

Apparently, all the information is stemming from a webcast that was being done by Bashandslash
 
A couple of key points: 

  • Servers run on IW.NET, which runs IN CONJUNCTION with Steam (resource hogging anyone?)
  • No dedicated servers
  • Matchmaking IS implemented
  • Private matches are customizable
  • Most of the feature set for multiplayer IS the same exact thing as the consoles
  • VAC will be replacing PunkBuster
  • "Competitive" gaming won't exist unless IW loads it up to the backend of IW.NET
 
This...seriously...is fucking depressing as Hell.  As a longtime PC gamer (I've got WSAD tattooed on my fucking fingers, man!!!)...this is a goddamn travesty.  Nothing less. 
 
@Mikemcn:    IW       IS      DOING THIS!!!  This isn't Activision.
#58 Edited by Mikemcn (7018 posts) -

http://www.n4g.com/industrynews/News-412887.aspx 
 
Theres a fucking audio clip of him saying it, good bye Call of Duty, HELLO LEFT 4 DEAD and ASSASSINS CREED 
 
go to 1 hour 41 minutes, and he says it will interfere with the ingame browser and some other Activision bullshit. 
 
and i guess me and Jkob both got similar info.... ok cool.
#59 Edited by JoelTGM (5596 posts) -

wait, what?  What am I supposed to do with no dedicated servers?  Meh, I'm going to spend the money on Borderlands instead.  
edit:  and done, bought borderlands off steam :)

#60 Posted by Diamond (8634 posts) -

Oh the melodrama.  Honestly, the 360 version of COD4 was perfectly fine online, I never had any problems with it.  Of course PC fanboys who never actually played the console versions will disagree, but that's why it was such a success on consoles.  As Jeff has said on the podcast, Modern Warfare 2 is a 360 game that is getting ported to other platforms.  That's the way gaming is these days, and frankly it's not bad at all.

#61 Posted by Mikemcn (7018 posts) -

Im really deppressed now, i'll go play some valve games, at least i can trust those people......
#62 Posted by noobeffect (111 posts) -
@Meteora: Dedicated servers don't require maintenance from developers. They do however need patching sometimes. A dedicated server is when someone hosts a server but the host doesn't have to be there which is where Game Server Providers come in. An example website would be Velocity. Users purchase a dedicated server that would be hosted by the game server provider and that server would remain online all the time allowing players to come in and out whenever they like. Most providers allow administrators to modify the files within a dedicated server, allowing custom content into the servers. This entire IW.net plan seems to be a method for IW/Activision to get their DLC out there in a way they would like.
#63 Posted by jakob187 (21757 posts) -

Seriously...I had respect and love for IW through so much...but this...this fucking kills it!

#64 Posted by MrGetBonus (784 posts) -

Well Dragon Ball Raging Blast comes out same day. Maybe I'll drop my money on that instead and throw out some kamehamehas lol.

#65 Posted by FireBurger (1479 posts) -
@Kazona said:
" But if you can host the game on your console without problems, why couldn't you host it on your PC? Why does the PC side need dedicated servers, but consoles don't? "
It's not that it will cause "problems," it's that PC gaming has pretty much always had dedicated servers running, whether the "host" was online or not. It allows clans to have a place to always go, and allows people to play somewhere consistently with a community of players they're familiar with. Without dedicated servers, you always end up playing with random people or having to go out of the way to set up private games.
 
For instance, even if you're not in a clan, you could always go to the same dedicated server and get to know the people playing there.
 
As for the modding, that's just Activision being afraid that people won't buy their map packs. While I don't know I'd call it wrong of them, they're certainly going to piss a lot of people off  given that mods have been the norm for most PC games. I can see the argument both ways. I will say I think it's shortsighted, though. One of the reasons many people stick with a game for a long time or come back to it is because of the variety that mods bring.
#66 Edited by Mikemcn (7018 posts) -
@Diamond said:
"Oh the melodrama.  Honestly, the 360 version of COD4 was perfectly fine online, I never had any problems with it.  Of course PC fanboys who never actually played the console versions will disagree, but that's why it was such a success on consoles.  As Jeff has said on the podcast, Modern Warfare 2 is a 360 game that is getting ported to other platforms.  That's the way gaming is these days, and frankly it's not bad at all. "

 
@FireBurger said:
" @Kazona said:
" But if you can host the game on your console without problems, why couldn't you host it on your PC? Why does the PC side need dedicated servers, but consoles don't? "
It's not that it will cause "problems," it's that PC gaming has pretty much always had dedicated servers running, whether the "host" was online or not. It allows clans to have a place to always go, and allows people to play somewhere consistently with a community of players they're familiar with. Without dedicated servers, you always end up playing with random people or having to go out of the way to set up private games.  For instance, even if you're not in a clan, you could always go to the same dedicated server and get to know the people playing there.  As for the modding, that's just Activision being afraid that people won't buy their map packs. While I don't know I'd call it wrong of them, they're certainly going to piss a lot of people off  given that mods have been the norm for most PC games. I can see the argument both ways. I will say I think it's shortsighted, though. One of the reasons many people stick with a game for a long time or come back to it is because of the variety that mods bring. "

You can have matchmaking and things for clans like that without removing the entire fucking browser, sure, consoles can't handle that but PC can.
#67 Posted by PsyFX (13 posts) -

Now more reasons to sign the petition against purchasing MW2   GG IW & Activision  
http://www.petitiononline.com/cod6/petition.html

#68 Posted by Famov (768 posts) -


I'm in way over my head on this one, but I will say this: It's not good to make your customers angry. The problem is that the angry customers in this instance are a marginalized minority that the company frankly has no interest in anymore.

I am sure that the indignation from the PC gamers here is very well deserved, but Activision and Infinity Ward has made it very clear who it is they want to buy this game.

#69 Posted by MasterOfPenguins_Zell (2093 posts) -
@PsyFX:
Online petitions don't usually do anything. Good luck with it though, Bobby Kotick is such an ass, that it probably won't get very far. I feel bad for PC gamers, and think that not having dedicated servers is quite an injustice. =/
#70 Posted by mhkjtha (429 posts) -

Anyone who buys this disgrace on the pc should go to hell.

#71 Posted by dbz1995 (4790 posts) -
@Gizmo said:
" @Metal_Mills said:
" 402 was meant to have said it on a chat thing and is also on this podcast(Very first subject).  http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/2369799  This is utterly insane for a PC game. I'm no longer buying this piece of shit. Fuck Activision to hell. No mods is bad, but I can live without. Dedicated servers are the bread and butter of a PC online game. Fucking...fuck! "

"
STOP POSTING THAT THING. IT ALMOST MAKES ME ROFL TO DEATH.
#72 Posted by MasterOfPenguins_Zell (2093 posts) -
@mhkjtha: I hope that people in the PC community actually follow through with this. Usually it ends up falling through and people buy it anyway. =/
#73 Posted by jakob187 (21757 posts) -
@Diamond said:
" Oh the melodrama.  Honestly, the 360 version of COD4 was perfectly fine online, I never had any problems with it.  Of course PC fanboys who never actually played the console versions will disagree, but that's why it was such a success on consoles.  As Jeff has said on the podcast, Modern Warfare 2 is a 360 game that is getting ported to other platforms.  That's the way gaming is these days, and frankly it's not bad at all. "
I played a ton of the 360 version of CoD4...and the MINUTE that we finally got it installed on the PCs here at work, I threw that controller down and ran to the PC.  The online for CoD4 was BEARABLE...but it was not "fine". 
 
This is yet another swipe at the community that has continued to redefine gaming for over a decade.  It's interesting to see how many console players are so ungrateful to PC players.
#74 Posted by SunKing (686 posts) -

What I'm so surprised at is that none of the major news sites – Joystiq, Kotaku or VG247 – have picked this up yet as a story. Maybe they're waiting for confirmation from Bowling?

#75 Posted by gosukiller (2325 posts) -
@HitmanAgent47: I believe those rumors were discredited today so the PC version will not be delayed for 2 weeks.
 http://kotaku.com/5383936/fourzerotwo-modern-warfare-2-is-not-delayed-on-pc
#76 Posted by rateoforange (403 posts) -
@Diamond said:
" Oh the melodrama.  Honestly, the 360 version of COD4 was perfectly fine online, I never had any problems with it.  Of course PC fanboys who never actually played the console versions will disagree, but that's why it was such a success on consoles.  As Jeff has said on the podcast, Modern Warfare 2 is a 360 game that is getting ported to other platforms.  That's the way gaming is these days, and frankly it's not bad at all. "
I've always wondered how someone accumulates a post count like yours. Now I know: by weighing in on topics they know nothing about.
#77 Posted by Gizmo (5389 posts) -
@dbz1995 said:
" @Gizmo said:
" @Metal_Mills said:
" 402 was meant to have said it on a chat thing and is also on this podcast(Very first subject).  http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/2369799  This is utterly insane for a PC game. I'm no longer buying this piece of shit. Fuck Activision to hell. No mods is bad, but I can live without. Dedicated servers are the bread and butter of a PC online game. Fucking...fuck! "

"
STOP POSTING THAT THING. IT ALMOST MAKES ME ROFL TO DEATH. "
Dude, that was my actual reaction to this post, and I kinda look like the sloth in the picture.
#78 Posted by jakob187 (21757 posts) -
@Metal_Mills: If you would like, you can post the link that I put in my bulleted list, as that is the original source of most of this information...and Kotaku has a story up now as well.
#79 Posted by MAN_FLANNEL (2462 posts) -

I bet all 53 people that were going to buy the PC version are outraged.

#80 Edited by Diamond (8634 posts) -
@jakob187 said:

I played a ton of the 360 version of CoD4...and the MINUTE that we finally got it installed on the PCs here at work, I threw that controller down and ran to the PC.  The online for CoD4 was BEARABLE...but it was not "fine".

See, I can't agree with that.  You think COD4 on 360 was bearable?  That seems insane to me.
 

@jakob187

said:

This is yet another swipe at the community that has continued to redefine gaming for over a decade.

What?  This isn't a swipe at console gamers.  Well OK, I agree there are many important innovations in the realm of PC gaming, but not in the last few years.  I think that's because of the business side of things changing, but whatever.
 
@jakob187 said:

It's interesting to see how many console players are so ungrateful to PC players.

It's interesting to see how many PC gamers are ungrateful for console players.  Console gamers have basically been supporting PC gaming financially for the last 3 years.
 
 
I don't disagree PC gamers should complain about this, as I complain about rampant DLC and other greed-based decisions.  However, PC gamers have been ignoring the problem of declining sales for too long, people have to start buying games.  Optimally they should buy games that have the features PC gamers want, but this problem is caused by PC gamers.  I'm certain if there were still significant money in it, MW2 wouldn't have ended up this way.
 
 @rateoforange said:

I've always wondered how someone accumulates a post count like yours. Now I know: by weighing in on topics they know nothing about.

  Because sniping people on forums for expressing their opinion is a worthwhile use of time, right?
#81 Posted by SunKing (686 posts) -

Yeah, because most FPSs are huge flops on the platform that started it all. :rollseyes:

#82 Posted by Chaos9211 (3 posts) -

 
i guess cod4 was the last of a dying breed...

#83 Posted by Binman88 (3690 posts) -

I played well over 250 hours of MW on the PC, and a contributing factor to the enjoyment that kept me hooked to the game, like other multiplayer games in the past, was the ability to pick and choose what servers to join and who I wanted to play with. Taking that choice and reliability away in MW2 is such a suprisingly retrograde step that will only serve to negatively impact the online community and the lifespan of the game (and possibly sales of this and future titles in the series).
 
I haven't had much experience with matchmaking games so I hope someone could explain to me how me and a few buddies would be able to join the same game together, without hosting a private game ourselves?

#84 Edited by SunKing (686 posts) -

 

@Diamond

said:


@jakob187

said:

This is yet another swipe at the community that has continued to redefine gaming for over a decade.

What?  This isn't a swipe at console gamers.  Well OK, I agree there are many important innovations in the realm of PC gaming, but not in the last few years.  I think that's because of the business side of things changing, but whatever.
Peggle; World of Warcraft; Battlefield 1942; Team Fortress 2; Left 4 Dead; Medieval: Total War: all are games which have seriously made waves in their respective genres or have contributed to the ever-changing landscape of video games.
 
Edit: and let me add that list Wolf:ET, the archetypal model for CoD4's experience system; System Shock 2, without which we wouldn't have BioShock; and the Fallout and Balder's Gate series, without which we wouldn't have Mass Effect, KotoR and Dragon Age.

 

 

@jakob187

said:

It's interesting to see how many console players are so ungrateful to PC players.

It's interesting to see how many PC gamers are ungrateful for console players.  Console gamers have basically been supporting PC gaming financially for the last 3 years.

Er, what? Could you explain what you mean here?
#85 Posted by Diamond (8634 posts) -
@Binman88 said:
I haven't had much experience with matchmaking games so I hope someone could explain to me how me and a few buddies would be able to join the same game together, without hosting a private game ourselves?
I can't tell you what all features the PC version of MW2 will have, but generally you set up a private server and invite friends.
#86 Posted by rateoforange (403 posts) -
@Diamond: You admittedly don't understand the importance of dedicated servers and mods and chalk all the hubbub up to "PC fanboys who never actually played the console versions." That's a pretty inflammatory and ignorant position to take. So yeah, you have a right to your opinion. All I did was call it uninformed, which it is.
#87 Posted by gosukiller (2325 posts) -

It really boggles the mind why Infinity Ward would give gamers on such a versatile system LESS options.. I can see why you wouldnt do modding, maybe you want to sell mods as DLC? 
But why, oh why, would you take away Dedicated servers? This is the power of PC online gaming you are tainting, you want to give us more lag?

#88 Posted by NinjaHunter (973 posts) -
@Binman88 said:
" I played well over 250 hours of MW on the PC, and a contributing factor to the enjoyment that kept me hooked to the game, like other multiplayer games in the past, was the ability to pick and choose what servers to join and who I wanted to play with. Taking that choice and reliability away in MW2 is such a suprisingly retrograde step that will only serve to negatively impact the online community and the lifespan of the game (and possibly sales of this and future titles in the series).  I haven't had much experience with matchmaking games so I hope someone could explain to me how me and a few buddies would be able to join the same game together, without hosting a private game ourselves? "
I would assume they would have a party system.
#89 Posted by Diamond (8634 posts) -
@SunKing said:
Peggle; World of Warcraft; Battlefield 1942; Team Fortress 2; Left 4 Dead; Medieval: Total War: all are games which have seriously made waves in their respective genres or have contributed to the ever-changing landscape of video games.
BF 1942 is old now, that's definitely in the realm of PC gaming still being innovative.  Team Fortress 2 was based heavily on TF1, which was the real innovative title, basically created class based online gaming.  Left 4 Dead and TF2 were both console games as well.  Peggle is a decent recent example though.
 
@SunKing said:
Er, what? Could you explain what you mean here?
With all multiplatform titles console gamers are buying the most copies.  It's the reason there aren't many PC exclusives these days, you couldn't support a game like Modern Warfare 2 on PC alone.  Odds are 360 and PS3 buyers will support 95% (insert random majority percentage here) of the development process.
#90 Posted by Binman88 (3690 posts) -
@Diamond said:
" @Binman88 said:
I haven't had much experience with matchmaking games so I hope someone could explain to me how me and a few buddies would be able to join the same game together, without hosting a private game ourselves?
I can't tell you what all features the PC version of MW2 will have, but generally you set up a private server and invite friends. "
That's what I thought. So if it's just me and one friend who want to join an already populated game in progress, we're pretty much fucked?
#91 Edited by jakob187 (21757 posts) -
@Diamond: PC gaming hasn't helped innovate in the last three years?  You are ABSOLUTELY right...and you're welcome for Call of Duty even existing, by the way.  I also can't help it that companies would rather dull down their online with horrid matchmaking setups plagued with lag.   
 
As for buying games, I'm completely anti-piracy...but I have issues with it whenever it comes at the cost of what makes the PC the "platform" that it is.  I mean, what's next?  EVERYONE is able to install and partition a hard drive, build a killer gaming rig?  Should we honestly dumb down the PC?  That's what is happening right now:  this is a slap in the face to the community that has helped to create what is modern gaming. 
 
Here's the issue:  PC gaming has constantly influenced console gaming, even to this point...and now companies are trying to reverse it.  You said it best, to be honest:  the BUSINESS part is what's going to do PC gaming in.  Do I think that PC people have had it pretty easy over the years with free content via patches?  Yeah.  Should they have to pay for that content?  I'm divided on it.  On one hand, it's PC.  That's part of the package with PC as it is.  Trying to improve the way business is handled should NOT come at the reduction of quality in the product, and this new setup - no dedicated servers, adding matchmaking, no mod capabilities - defeats the purpose of EVERYTHING that the PC is about. 
 
And yes...CoD4 on 360 was BEARABLE at best.  Connection Interrupted.  Host ended the game.  Poor leaderboard tracking system.  No true community, just a minority of decent players and a ton of fuckwits.
#92 Posted by Diamond (8634 posts) -
@rateoforange said:
" @Diamond: You admittedly don't understand the importance of dedicated servers and mods and chalk all the hubbub up to "PC fanboys who never actually played the console versions." That's a pretty inflammatory and ignorant position to take. So yeah, you have a right to your opinion. All I did was call it uninformed, which it is. "
In the case of COD4, the game was absolutely fine on 360.  It's not ignorant because the 360 version was fine, and one of the best netcodes on consoles, which is why it was a massive success.
#93 Posted by Mikemcn (7018 posts) -

@rateoforange said:

" @Diamond: You admittedly don't understand the importance of dedicated servers and mods and chalk all the hubbub up to "PC fanboys who never actually played the console versions." That's a pretty inflammatory and ignorant position to take. So yeah, you have a right to your opinion. All I did was call it uninformed, which it is. "


 

Yea, dedicated servers and mods are what make multiplayer fun, the game itself only provides so much enjoyment, it also means publishers and developers dont want the consumer to have any freedoms. Im sure Diamond can agree that its always better of the player has choices in how he or she plays a game. Console makers have restricted what you can do on your Xbox or Playstation, people have put up with it, and now they are doing it on PC.
#94 Posted by rateoforange (403 posts) -

This isn't about some console vs. pc pissing match. Do we really need to rehash that battle here for the thousandth time?

#95 Edited by SunKing (686 posts) -

Good point. The main issue here is that this is a move that will allow Activision to make more money and keep more control over how people play their game, all at the expense of the end user's experience.

#96 Edited by jakob187 (21757 posts) -
@rateoforange said:

" This isn't about some console vs. pc pissing match. Do we really need to rehash that battle here for the thousandth time? "

This IS a pissing match.  It's very much a pissing match of that type.  The feature set for MW2 on PC is now that of the consoles, which is NOT the correct option.  Why would the PC industry honestly allow consoles to influence them when PC has always been the leading platform of innovation in gaming?  It's everything to do with business.  I'd be perfectly fine with having to pay for the damn map packs on PC...so long as I don't have to deal with matchmaking and can instead have the option of dedicated servers and modding. 
 
I'll be honest:  Gearbox has to be jumping for joy at this announcement right now!  LOL  Their PC community just grew a little more!
#97 Posted by Mikemcn (7018 posts) -
@SunKing said:
"Good point. The main issue here is that this is a move that will allow Activision to make more money and keep more control over how people play their game, all at the expense of the end user's experience. "

Thats my point, im not trying to bash consoles, it just seems like developers have gotten away with alot on consoles that they can't (At least not yet anyways.) on PC.
#98 Posted by SunKing (686 posts) -

Yup. I'm a cynic, so I expected that with MW2 they'd make people pay for DLC, but I honestly had no idea how far they'd go.

#99 Posted by jakob187 (21757 posts) -

I'm curious to hear what a PC diehard like Hamz thinks of this...

#100 Edited by rateoforange (403 posts) -

No, this isn't the time to compare wangs. The bottom line is that a decent PC multiplayer game (that is not an mmo) has support for dedicated servers. This isn't the time to bark at the moon either. Let's just take our dollars elsewhere.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.