In recent news, John Carmack stated that the new id Software FPS, racing hybrid, Rage will unlikely have the use of dedicated servers in the release of the game.

Carmack revealed to Variety;

"It's not cast in stone yet, but at this point no, we don't think we will have dedicated servers.We won't have to be a pioneer on that. We'll see how it works out for everyone else."

This has been a seemingly alarming trend in the PC gaming world as of late with the latest news revealed by Infinity Ward that their new shooter "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2" will not support dedicated servers, taking the power out of the hands of the modding community who thrives on making the the game experience all their own and cashing in on the popularity of console gaming with small, 9vs9 matches hosted from a non-dedicated source. This has brought up a myriad of concerns with the PC gaming community as far as a massive backlash by gamers that brought on a petition that saw more than 180,000 signatures to include dedicated servers and mods. Infinity Ward has only nodded at the petitions existence and failed to comment directly on the matter. Other titles such as "Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising" have also left out dedicated servers in favor for peer to peer hosting and matchmaking, something often only seen in the console gaming world with the advent of small-scale console only FPS' like Halo 3 for the Xbox 360. With Modern Warfare 2 surely to be one of the largest selling games of 2009, is it safe to assume that Infinity Ward will usher in a dark age of peer 2 peer hosting for multiplayer games? Upcoming games such as the PS3 exclusive MAG, supporting up to 128 vs 128 players and DICE's Battlefield: Bad Company 2 exclusively stating on their twitter that they will in fact, have dedicated servers may just be the positive reinforcement us devout PC gamers need. What are your thoughts on this whole matter? Disturbing trend or blatant flop?