This is the problem with PC Gamers and why we don't like it:
We base our communities around "micro-cultures" or what I like to call, "micro-communities." The clans and guilds are responsible for making the game good, creating rule sets for different game styles, and enforcing law over people that hack. It seems that Infinity Ward, Microsoft and PlayStation, want the credit for making the community what it is, but the real truth is that the community is in the hands of the guild or clan. Many communities have been around for years, before CoD 1 and probably as early or earlier than Quake 1. Server reputations are formed, and with the clan upholding the rules and guidelines, you can guarantee 99.9% of the time the experience is going to be the same. This is something you cannot and will never be able to guarantee with a matchmaking service, especially if you want to run a "tactical real" server where you must aim to shoot, no blind grenades and many other rules.
This is about control, this is about piracy. Yes, I am still going to buy the game, but only for the single player experience. I will continue play COD: WaW on the server that I currently play on because I know for a fact my experience will be similar to my last. I can expect high quality players, a good map rotation, no lip service from douchebags and just an overall great time.
For some reason, I do have an opinion about this and I previously wrote a comment on Kotaku about it. I will iterate what I said there:
The most successful communities for CoD4/5 are not based around the game itself, but around the clans/guilds that organize rule-based servers. These "microcommunities" are the backbone of the First Person Shooter community. Without these niche-style communities the people you like to play with, that you might even hate, won't be as accessible since there isn't a 24/7 dedicated server running.
Sure, the idea of being able to play any game you want, with a group of people who our of same quality sounds like a great thing. However, without controls and rule sets defined by a certain "microcommunity," the game is nothing but a large douchefest.
I personally enjoy playing on the 5th ranked CoD5 server (according to gametracker) ran by a clan called New Centurions (NC). NC has a set of rules that mimic "realism" without going too far beyond the game. Without a dedicated server for these guys, and not being a part of the guild, I will not be able to play with them. Yes, they could add me to their friends list, but to start a game and have everyone online at one given time to have a full 20 vs. 20 game will be impossible.
Oh boy, a political topic. I think all of you are wrong however. LoL
I am pro-life and NOT because of religion (I am an atheist) and NOT because I think that babies are "alive" at some point in the womb. I am a pro-lifer because I believe that we all must be responsible for our actions, no matter how foolish or accidental you claim to be. To me, it's not an argument about right to life or a womans right. If you can't take responsibilty for your actions with something as simple as sex, then what can you be responsible with? Sometimes we are not responsible for actions of others and considering the original posters comment, a young girl is not responsible for being raped. Since responsibility plays a key part in my idea of pro-life, I believe women who were raped do have the right to abort the baby.
People have mentioned retardation and other possible diseases that may occur in newborns. This argument is not sound and I will tell you why. Say all this research into DNA and genetics finds a gene that will diagnose a person with cancer when they are 25 years old. Should the mother have the right to abort the baby because at 25 years of age that person will suffer? Consider my case... my mother died at 29 years of age when I was just 5 or 6 years old. I was diagnosed with Hodgkins Lymphoma, at the same age she was diagnosed with Hodkins Lymphoma. I survived and am now 31 years of age. If a geneticist or doctor saw that I would have had this disease when I was in the womb, should the mother have the right to abort me based off that claim? What if they are wrong, but I still hold the gene (although lymphoma hasn't been placed to a gene yet). This is all hypothetical based off previous posters.
Well, those are my thoughts, I will be here all week.