A View From the Road: Unreasonably Dedicated

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

The issue I have with their statement that "we want one experience across all platforms" is that, instead of raising up the console platforms by allowing dedicated-server functionality and ability to utilize custom content (which, quite frankly, consoles have been theoretically capable of for some time now), they are lowering the PC platform by ignoring its strengths and making the game perform functionally similar to the console versions.

Imagine that Microsoft finally released Project Natal for the 360, and it was a complete smash, making for some revolutionary abilities in games. But then the company working on your most anticipated game of the year decided not to support Natal, because "it would cause too much difference between the platform versions". It's their right, sure, but wouldn't it upset you (if you owned the 360 and Natal) that the company refused to support something you valued for that reason?

John, I both agree and disagree with your article (yes, I can do that). I agree that there are too many PC gamers screaming "YOU HAVE TO DO IT OUR WAY" while plugging their ears to any opinion to the contrary. It's annoying and it drowns out those of us who want a more reasonable discourse; almost every time the discussion comes up, it turns into an Internet shouting match, with "correctness" apparently judged by who can type the longest caps-locked insults with the most exclamation points at the end.

However, to say that we PC gamers shouldn't question a game that's "not better enough"- I can't agree with that. PCs have unique strengths that should be leveraged by any game made specifically for them. It might cost a little more to develop this way, yes, but maybe companies can save up money for that by not hiring Patrick Stewart to voice three dozen lines. Is it irrational to expect that a game released for the PC should take advantage of everything the PC has to offer? I don't think so- in fact, I would expect the owners of any of the current-gen consoles to want the exact same thing.

paketep:
Micropayments. That's what they want, and they'll say whatever thing that passes through their minds to justify it. They work on 3 or 4 maps, easy as pie, they put them out there at $10, and a million consolers buy them. Lots of profit with almost no work. Why not force PC gamers to do the same and buy them?. Also, if we don't let them make maps anymore they'll have even more need of new content. Mods are out, too!.

I made much the same point myself not too long ago, and this is what I see as the end goal of many developers. Why bother supporting tools for user-made Mods when you can hook a captive audience with whatever content you choose to dribble out? It's either buy the DLC or sit there staring at the same old game over and over.

Oh, and to all those who say "just shut up and don't buy the game": If we don't tell the publishers why it is we didn't buy their game, how are they supposed to know?

This is why the argument or complaint shouldn't be about the ego or attitude of the PC gamer. The argument should stem from IW destroying business and innovation within the video game industry.

If there was any reason why PC gaming hasn't died, the reason is that the community creates future employees of the video game industry. Also from having dedicated servers there has been a business of renting, maintaining and creating video game servers. It is from this angle where the PC community stand to win against video game developers and publishers.

If there is one other reason dedicated servers should remain it is this: price control. With so many games having their developers and publishers focus on online multiplayer there is an opportunity to increase the price of the product. It all comes down to ownership, IW's servers gave activision the excuse to inflate the price of Modern Warfare 2. By having the community control, run and maintain alternative servers the price is controlled because the community can control who is offering the service.

This is basic business and Activision is choking the current model to increase revenue, community be damned.

I still don't see why they can't just have BOTH. I mean come on really? We'll see how the PC version sells, and since I don't have any money to dish out on it I'll just sit back and see what happens. Either way, this will be interesting.

Edit: So basically what I got out this article after reading it again is basically either we become the dev's bitch, or say fuck you and they will hate us and stop supporting the PC.

Mr Funk, would you kindly comment on some of the responses in this thread? PC games, while they can be bad, still have the capacity to be clear, consise, and nonoffensive in their comments. I would like to know your reaction to many of the posts here, especially those of Cheeze_Pavillion and dududf's responses.

CantFaketheFunk:
Remember that the most powerful protest tool at your disposal is your wallet. If it infuriates you so much, don't buy the game.

Wow. If that's the best tool we have, then we're weak indeed. According to this, I've refused to buy any number of games which have been wildly successful. I can't think of one game that would have been significantly more successful at retail if I had purchased it.

I won't be purchasing Modern Warfare 2 on various principles and other more mundane reasons, but it will still sell like mad. Hell - not a single non-PC gamer will buy StarCraft 2: Wings of Liberty, and it will still achieve monstrous commercial success.

Did everyone in the last 2 months forget that we are CONSUMERS, and as CONSUMERS we can demand higher quality. I understand the whole thing that some people are being kinda rude, but the fact is, as a community we demand quality, and as consumers we have that right to demand more. John Funk seems to get most of our beliefs, but come on we are not entitled, while some idiots might be saying our ideas in a wrong way it might seem like that, we just want quality games, with quality features. If you strip away those features we just get a bunch of Halos and mediocre games, and a console that is the Xbox 360. Dedicates servers are our soul. Xbox is good and all, but they are different, and that is all good and dandy, just don't try to invade my community, destroy it, and then say we are privileged. We just want what makes the PC community, the PC community. If modern warfare wants to cater to the Xbox that is fine, but stop trying to push their ways onto PC gamers.

Donnyp:

vivaldiscool:
]I bought the 85 Dollar Version of Fallout 3 for my PS3. Now when they announced PS3 won't get the DLC for at least a year did i Flip out and make online Petitions and boycott it? Nope. I Waited. Then when it was released with Glitches a plenty did i freak out because i spent 10 Dollars on it? Nope. I enjoyed it. To say your entitled to a good Product because you Shell out 60 Dollars is like saying cause you paid the hooker an extra 20 bucks she has to cuddle with you afterwards. Seriously you can do so much more then Complain and Say you are "entitled to the best product they can give you. Well. Heres what they gave you. Its the product they are giving you and you should assume its good enough for you. Do i think i'm entitled to better games cause i play a PS3? No. I enjoy what i'm given and if its good so be it. All of you need to CHILL THE FUCK OUT! its a game. Not a way of life. Your acting as if someone slapped your mother in the mouth. So Report me. Tell them to Ban me. Get angry and start a lame flame war with me. But know 2 things. 1 i won't respond to you. and 2. By doing any of that i won. Just because i know that if you do i struck a nerve and made you angry. while im relaxed.

Here's the basic problem with your point, you didn't actually approach any of the issues I brought up. Here's a few of the main things.

To say your entitled to a good Product because you Shell out 60 Dollars is like saying cause you paid the hooker an extra 20 bucks she has to cuddle with you afterwards.

If I payed her top dollar, yes I would be entitled. There's a categorical difference between devs who went above and beyond the call of duty for what they're getting payed, and devs who do less then what is even the industry average.

I enjoy what i'm given and if its good so be it. All of you need to CHILL THE FUCK OUT!

First off, I said fuck once, you're the only one here shouting, you're the only one here raging. Secondly, you're not given anything. "You enjoy what you pay for, and if its good so be it" is a view that will waste a lot of money. That's what I mean when I say this isn't altruism.

I'd say there was a categorical difference with your fallout example. You were upset because they didn't put in extra work for a PS3 port, we're upset because they arbitrarily decided to do less work, to gimp a system everybody already loved.

If you don't respond, it means you don't have any backable points and I win. (Seriously dude, that's a really cheap and juvenile way to end a post. Please let your points speak for themselves, rather than just add your screaming voice to the growing din.

I had a long detailed and reasonable post to put up, but Firefox crashed and lost it.

I'll drop it to three sentences.

We're not all elitists. We just want to stop the programmed obsolescence before it starts, and removing 15 year old standards without a reason stinks as bad as dropping licences that won't spawn sequels.
What does a PC owner do, who wasn't going to buy MW, when he knows that it will become a business model that others will use?

it might be me talking out of my ass, but the pc gamers are entiltled to complain, but god damn set up somewhere to where you can complain about it and go there, and then maybe(but i doubt it.) we can get rid of all the " i'm not buying MW2." (as if most of us cared what you did with your money.) threads. and if there [i]is[/I] somewhere for you to compalin(that isn't here.) and your just choosing to complain here, stop and go to the other one. because i'm sick of all these compaliners. both sides, acttually(the complainers and the complainers complaining about the 1st complainers.). /rant.

The Rogue Wolf:
The issue I have with their statement that "we want one experience across all platforms" is that, instead of raising up the console platforms by allowing dedicated-server functionality and ability to utilize custom content (which, quite frankly, consoles have been theoretically capable of for some time now), they are lowering the PC platform by ignoring its strengths and making the game perform functionally similar to the console versions.

Imagine that Microsoft finally released Project Natal for the 360, and it was a complete smash, making for some revolutionary abilities in games. But then the company working on your most anticipated game of the year decided not to support Natal, because "it would cause too much difference between the platform versions". It's their right, sure, but wouldn't it upset you (if you owned the 360 and Natal) that the company refused to support something you valued for that reason?

John, I both agree and disagree with your article (yes, I can do that). I agree that there are too many PC gamers screaming "YOU HAVE TO DO IT OUR WAY" while plugging their ears to any opinion to the contrary. It's annoying and it drowns out those of us who want a more reasonable discourse; almost every time the discussion comes up, it turns into an Internet shouting match, with "correctness" apparently judged by who can type the longest caps-locked insults with the most exclamation points at the end.

However, to say that we PC gamers shouldn't question a game that's "not better enough"- I can't agree with that. PCs have unique strengths that should be leveraged by any game made specifically for them. It might cost a little more to develop this way, yes, but maybe companies can save up money for that by not hiring Patrick Stewart to voice three dozen lines. Is it irrational to expect that a game released for the PC should take advantage of everything the PC has to offer? I don't think so- in fact, I would expect the owners of any of the current-gen consoles to want the exact same thing.

paketep:
Micropayments. That's what they want, and they'll say whatever thing that passes through their minds to justify it. They work on 3 or 4 maps, easy as pie, they put them out there at $10, and a million consolers buy them. Lots of profit with almost no work. Why not force PC gamers to do the same and buy them?. Also, if we don't let them make maps anymore they'll have even more need of new content. Mods are out, too!.

I made much the same point myself not too long ago, and this is what I see as the end goal of many developers. Why bother supporting tools for user-made Mods when you can hook a captive audience with whatever content you choose to dribble out? It's either buy the DLC or sit there staring at the same old game over and over.

Oh, and to all those who say "just shut up and don't buy the game": If we don't tell the publishers why it is we didn't buy their game, how are they supposed to know?

Thank you, I just started to write my response but you summed it up perfectly

anyways to contribute my 2 cents, me personally my rage has been 90% confusion, Im mean why take something out thats been the standard of PC gaming since, well forever. It's be much easier to go with the standard dedicated servers then create some BS IW.NET thingymajig. I agree, there has been a lot of PC Gamer's whining, but at least it's (as much as whining can be) justified, rather then the countless PS3 snd Xbox 360 fanboys raging all the time, I have half a mind to call you a troll for writing a whole article on why we need to quit whining.

Instead of calling us whiners for getting a downgraded version for PC, you should tell the console gamers to start questioning why haven't the consoles been upgraded by now, and especially XBL, paying for internet twice is bullshit

oneplus999:
As much as I like the sentiment, I don't know why you'd bother writing a two page article on it.
image

Because, believe it or not, this is what he gets paid to do. The image you just posted - that's his life's calling. Evidently.

Sweet jeebus, what is with all the negative stuff about PC gamers lately?
Yes, some PC gamers are entitled, self important jerks. That's kind of a trend with humanity as a whole. The real problem is that these people tend to be louder and more vocal, so the percentage of a group they make up gets over represented (for example most Xbox users are probably decent people, but just ask anyone what "the xbox live crowd is like").

vivaldiscool:

Donnyp:

vivaldiscool:

Here's the basic problem with your point, you didn't actually approach any of the issues I brought up. Here's a few of the main things.

To say your entitled to a good Product because you Shell out 60 Dollars is like saying cause you paid the hooker an extra 20 bucks she has to cuddle with you afterwards.

If I payed her top dollar, yes I would be entitled. There's a categorical difference between devs who went above and beyond the call of duty for what they're getting payed, and devs who do less then what is even the industry average.

I enjoy what i'm given and if its good so be it. All of you need to CHILL THE FUCK OUT!

First off, I said fuck once, you're the only one here shouting, you're the only one here raging. Secondly, you're not given anything. "You enjoy what you pay for, and if its good so be it" is a view that will waste a lot of money. That's what I mean when I say this isn't altruism.

I'd say there was a categorical difference with your fallout example. You were upset because they didn't put in extra work for a PS3 port, we're upset because they arbitrarily decided to do less work, to gimp a system everybody already loved.

If you don't respond, it means you don't have any backable points and I win. (Seriously dude, that's a really cheap and juvenile way to end a post. Please let your points speak for themselves, rather than just add your screaming voice to the growing din.

Gonna say this once. I wasn't upset. Someone Needs to yell against all the voices and using the Word "Altruism" more then once doesn't look good. Buy the product don't buy it. I don't care and neither do the Games designers. To say your entitled is to say you deserve better. And clearly your wrong or they would have given you better.

Jandau:
Yaaaay! Broad generalizing statements piling an entire group of gamers into the same insulting label! Great work! [/sarcasm]

There are douchebags and idiots on all gaming platforms and PC is no exception. Singling out PC gamers and saying they should "get over themselves" and such is just plain hypocritical. Also, just stating "PC gamers" implies all of them. This in turn likely means that the person who is using the term in such a broad sense is likely the one who needs to "get over himself".

I've never seen large groups of Console Gamers get around in internet forums and leave long-winded angry rants about how they're pissed that they didn't treat their parituclar platform special. In fact, from the responses I've seen, we just live with games we have and put up with the exclusives we're missing out on.

If you think I'm saying Console Gamers are nicer and don't complain, then you misunderstand. They do just as much, but their bickering and arguing is never pointed at the companies just for not treating our platform as specially as we wish. The console bitching remains pointed at the other gamers, and whether this is because they understand the folly in expecting companies to treat a particular platform as special and give no privilages to others or because they find it easier to point their unfounded hatred towards individuals is unimportant, because the point remains that they don't petition and boycott as though they are somehow privilaged such that doing so is reasonable.

While I couldn't care less about what multiplayer features are available to which overrated shooters, I do feel as though anyone developing a FPS with the console market as their main goal (when they clearly started out as a PC developer) are motivated purely by money rather than making the best possible game, thus might deserve a little piracy coming their way.

It's pretty obvious that gaming is currently becoming the next major industry, with big business sinking its greedy fucking claws into it, turning it into something loathsome and vile like the movie and music industries. And I'm fairly sure we owe most of it to the next-gen consoles.

Infinity Ward owes PC gamers nothing... that is true.

...except a good game if we are paying 50 bucks for it.

If by our judgment peer-to-peer does not a good game make, then those $50, we may spend elsewhere as we please. Hooray capitalism (what filaments of it are left of it in the U.S.)

If we choose to share our views and encourage others to do the same, then hooray First Amendment. We still have that for the most part.

Peer-to-peer used to be fine but nowadays Internet traffic puts up road blocks against multiple peer-to-peer connections. We saw that with all the problems Demigod had until they adopted partial dedicated servers for those having problematic connections. Maybe PC gamers don't exactly have the right to be outraged since Infinity Ward can make a game any way they want. But I can understand the widespread disappointment.

Boron00:
Did everyone in the last 2 months forget that we are CONSUMERS, and as CONSUMERS we can demand higher quality.

Its laughable to think the "consumer" is capable of bringing about any sort of united front.

Look at all the "disappointments" we have ever had...Many consider X-MEN Origins: Wolverine to be pitiful...go on Wikipedia and see how much money it made...look at the fact that there is gonna be a sequel!

If anyone is gonna create a united front, it will be the game developers. They have an easier time meeting up in some backroom and agreeing to drop dedicated servers to push this garbage then we do with regarding to standing together and fighting it. In the end, most of us will just take it.

(I mean MW2's campaign, as impressive as it will be, will be the same short single player experience as the first...but we'll probably just take it...)

CantFaketheFunk:
PC gamers, it's time we got the hell over ourselves.

I lol'd.

Oh, John. John, John, John. You of all people should know that real PC gamers wouldn't sully their reputations or their purity by having a console in the house. I think it's pretty clear you've been tainted, John.

That said, I think what we're seeing here - and forgive me if someone else has already brought this up, I skimmed but didn't read every reply in detail - is a release of the frustration a lot of PC gamers are feeling after months and years of being told we're second-class gamers. The format is dying, we're told. We have to wait months longer than the button-mashers for hot new releases. PCs are too expensive and too complicated. People don't want to play games on a PC. And it's our own fault anyway, since we're a bunch of out-of-control goddamn pirates who have driven the industry to the verge of bankruptcy.

And then Infinity Ward comes along with the most anticipated game of the year and says, "Sorry, but we're taking away all that stuff you've been doing for years, that you've taken for granted and that does, in fact, make for a better online shooter experience." To top it off, they try to spin it as a positive, like they're doing it for the good of the community. Is it any wonder a lot of PC gamers have copped an attitude?

I personally don't care. I'm still waiting for the original Modern Warfare price to drop, since I have zero intention of playing it online. Same goes for MW2; it's strictly a single-player game for me and as that, it's not worth anywhere near the current asking price. But I can very easily see it as the straw that broke the Carmack's back and if the angry attitude of the pissed-off PC demographic draws some attention and convinces a future developer or three to rethink the "consolization" of their games (and yes, I realize that word is emblematic of the "superior PC" attitude, but in this case it also fits) then I say, bring it on.

Jandau:
Yaaaay! Broad generalizing statements piling an entire group of gamers into the same insulting label! Great work! [/sarcasm]

There are douchebags and idiots on all gaming platforms and PC is no exception. Singling out PC gamers and saying they should "get over themselves" and such is just plain hypocritical. Also, just stating "PC gamers" implies all of them. This in turn likely means that the person who is using the term in such a broad sense is likely the one who needs to "get over himself".

No, not an entire group of gamers. And it's hardly JUST PC gamers who have this attitude, I just haven't had occasion to write about anyone else yet :P

Baron Khaine:

Just to go back to my original point in this, the problem is not a sense of entitlement, its the fact that the PC Community feel's that Infinity Ward has turned there back on us, after everything we did for them in the early day's, they've run off with there new hip friend's, the 360 gang. It's exactly the same as happened and is still happening with the Wii, it's pandering to casual gamer's, and the "hardcore gamer's", if such a term can be used for the Wii, feel left out, and dejected, by a company that they helped support by buying the Gamecube, Mario series etc.

Infinity Ward turned there back on PC Gaming, on the thing's that made us unique from the console's, and people won't just forget that.

Er, to be fair, that's *exactly* what I mean by sense of entitlement. That people feel the company owes you something, and are put out when it tries to cater to another group as well.

TMAN10112:
I'm not buying the game at this point, so I don't really care anymore.

But just to clarify:

GonzoGamer:
They aren't depriving the game of content like some other companies do to their pc versions.

Yes, they are.

They've gotten rid of the ability to use mods (Not to mention that the max player count is 9v9 now), removing dozens of hours worth of play time and free content. As a matter of fact, the Nazi-Zombies mode in COD:WAW was inspired by a zombie mod for Modern Warfare.

Not... really. In comparison to, say, COD4, maybe. But it isn't like there's stuff on the console version that they are actively withholding from the PC version.

Wizzie:
I like the article, however I can't really agree with it because it's only based on the MW2 protest. There's more to cover than the dedicated server issue and even then it stretches a little further than "we're not getting them".

As someone who used to play competative CoD4 alot, dedicated servers where the back bone of the scene.
Clans could have their own server, which they could lock and invite people into for friendies or ranked games or just have a practice session.
I'm curious to see how the competative scene will take to MW2 right now, simply because of the fact they can't do what was once so easy.
Without tools for modding too, basic comptetative setups like PAM are now out of the window.

As a CoD player, I'm not bothered about loosing the servers but as a competative player, my opinion would switch one hundered and eighty degrees the other way.
Had this article been based on something else, perhaps I'd agree a little more.

And like I said, there ARE genuinely valid reasons for people to be concerned about the game. I just don't think that the sheer vitriol I've seen on this form and others is a good way to get your point across, since it A.) makes other people more likely to dismiss it as simple ranting, and B.) drowns out any chance of honest discourse.

dududf:

Would you be annoyed that a game on, lets just say 360 came out and they didn't use all of the tools on hand, and expected you to like it?

That's how PC gamers feel, we are perplexed as to why companies are not USING the tools at hand, instead every game feels like a downgraded port.

Just imagine every game you play as a crappier version even though, from a tech perspective is a superior console.

It's just madness, and people don't understand that our out cry is not justified. Think next about games, now that a big step to killing PC games has been taken? A game that (for the life of me I can't remember, it was mentioned in a escapist post) has taken away ( or mostly considered taking away) Dedicated servers, because Activision took the plunge.

PC gaming is going to die very much quicker do to Actvision, when in maybe 15 years time we will be joyed when Wii sports 982 plus is ported to the PC for 500 bucks ( Obvious exageration)

>_>

Oh yeah and mouse and keyboard For the win! :]

First, I'm going to have to disagree - given the timing and how early on this type of choice has to be made, I think the decision to drop dedicated servers for Rage had to have been made well before now, but IW's announcement led Carmack to come clean about their plans, too, since they were no longer the first.

Second, I'm not sure how you mean it's a "downgraded port." I think that if you have a gaming PC capable of playing MW2 on maximum, you'd be a fool to get it for any other platform. It'll still look better, it'll still control better, and you'll still be able to customize the gaming experience in ways you can't ever do on the console. It still outstrips the console versions by a good margin.

paketep:
I think the rage comes not so much of a sense of entitlement over dedicated servers as for the fact that INFINITY WARD LIED BLATANTLY TO US, and waited until the last moment to throw the shitbombs, not to mention that they stole ideas from mods and don't even give them credit. That's where the attitude comes from.

And, frankly, I can't say I disagree. fourzerotwo has been a little bitch, and when reasonable questions in a calm manner have been presented to IW, they've responded by either "that breaks the balance" or "this is going to be better, so STFU".

Piracy?. Please, someone did an study this week, and pirates are only about 3-4% of the people playing COD4 right now in the net. Plus, you see the amount of piracy there has been for the 360 with MW2 this last week. ¿Are they getting punished for it?. No. The piracy argument has been BS for a long time.

Micropayments. That's what they want, and they'll say whatever thing that passes through their minds to justify it. They work on 3 or 4 maps, easy as pie, they put them out there at $10, and a million consolers buy them. Lots of profit with almost no work. Why not force PC gamers to do the same and buy them?. Also, if we don't let them make maps anymore they'll have even more need of new content. Mods are out, too!.

I'm not buying MW2, and I'm NOT losing the attitude. I feel it's more than justified. Perhaps it isn't, but in that case, fourzerotwo is doing a pisspoor job as PR head, sorry, creative strategist.

You know, if you think about it, he IS doing a really pisspoor job.

As covered in the piece, I don't think IW's response helped matters at all. For all his intention, Bowling (aka 402) did nothing but throw fuel on the flames. Honesty on IW's part wouldn't have gotten rid of the anger, but I think active deception only made matters worse.

Cheeze_Pavilion:

CantFaketheFunk:
What I don't understand - and what frankly has made me increasingly ashamed to call myself a PC gamer over the last few weeks - is the attitude. There is what seems to be a strong current of entitlement beneath it all, and the message from many of the protesters is clear: We deserve something above and beyond the call of duty (har har har) because we are PC gamers, and our platform of choice is special. In other words, "You owe us, Infinity Ward."

Wrong.

The message is: We (well, you: I play FPSes on the console where they belong, but that doesn't mean I can't have sympathy for my PC brethren) deserve exactly the same thing we've been getting all these years.

If you want to call that 'entitlement' (btw, I find it interesting to see a term--"entitlement"--that was used as a shorthand for all the ideas around it issue of male privilege working its way into common usage) that's fine: just don't attack a strawman in order to do so.

Personally, I don't see how it's 'entitlement' to ask a company not to start *taking away* features from a game. If PC gamers were complaining about consoles getting a feature in a sequel that was only available to the PC in the first game, that would be entitlement. When did it become 'entitlement' to complain about things being taken away from you? They got you to buy the original using that feature. Maybe you never would have bought the original game in the first place without that feature. This smacks of the whole 'first taste is free' mentality.

I think you're arguing against the wrong thing here. I'm not trying to say that people shouldn't be upset at the removal of these features. The thing that interests me - and that frankly irritates me - is the repeated suggestion that these people are angry at the idea of their version having anything to do with the mere console versions.

Now, by all means, return to your regularly scheduled protests, but remember that the most powerful protest tool at your disposal is your wallet. If it infuriates you so much, don't buy the game. Don't be a tool and pirate it - that just gives developers more reason to flee the PC platform entirely - but a refusal to purchase will speak louder than angry internet rants ever could.

Nope.

Refusing to buy the game is no different than piracy in this case: if enough people refuse to buy the game...guess what? That "gives developers more reason to flee the PC platform entirely" the same as piracy. Or at least, to justify taking out "graphics customization, text chat, and mouse & keyboard control" in the next game, using the same logic you are relying on to justify this reduction in features.

I mean, you say: "There's a difference between complaining about a PC title that is genuinely inferior to consoles (for a recent example, see multiplayer in Borderlands) and a PC version that's merely "not better enough."" Well, if you're asking the question: "what sense does it possibly make to allocate extra time, money, and manpower to their smallest fanbase" then why not ask the question: 'what sense does it possibly make to allocate EQUAL time, money, and manpower to their smallest fanbase'?

Just like the fact that you have a moral problem with piracy and not with boycotts doesn't mean they will have a different impact on the decisions of profit-driven corporations, the fact that you see asking for dedicated servers as an entitlement while asking for equal mulitplayer in Borderlands as justified will have no bearing on how companies behave.

Well, I suppose that stems from me thinking pirates are tools, and a boycott is perfectly legal within the confines of the law. I think that if you find that a game is not worth the asking price, you shouldn't buy it - but that also means you shouldn't get to play it.

vivaldiscool:
Funk, entitlement doesn't mean what you think it means.

Entitlement isn't even a word that applies in consumer culture. The entitlement argument could be an argument against piracy, but for someone who's shelling out $60 for the game, they are perfectly entitled to say we want a good game. If the dev was making it for free, and we complained, that would be entitlement.

In summation, you say dedicated servers are a good thing, but we paying customers are not entitled to them.

funk:
Gamers don't deserve good games

This isn't fucking altruism funk, the devs are getting payed for this, we give them our money, we are entitled to the best game they can make. That's the basic concept of capitalism.

You'd have a point if you'd already forked over the $60 and then found out it was going to drop the features. As it stands, you still have the choice to not pay them a dime because you don't think it's the "best game they can make." If it turns out no one buys their game, then clearly it wasn't good enough. Again, the 'entitlement' largely stems from people being offended that their version is comparable to the console version.

ratix2:
Cut down because this is getting a bit too long already

Well, this was already a stretch enough for my column as is :P The reason you haven't seen it is because I haven't had occasion to write about it yet. For the record, I think console elitists are just as irritating (and it's strange to see the parallels in this case between PC diehards -> console gamers and console diehards -> casual gamers / the Wii).

Valiance:

Personally, I don't give a damn about this game at all, so I don't mind. I get the feeling that people will have an entertaining multiplayer experience anyway, even without the features that they want. I get the feeling that this game will take off and sell fine anyway, and in the future, maybe we won't have dedicated server support for anything. That's kinda terrible, but hey, maybe there will be an interface that's good enough that the players will manage to enjoy anyway.

Long story short, I just mean to say that all this bitching is going to do nothing. Things will change anyway.

The thing that really interests me here is the idea that "Nothing can ever be better than dedicated servers, we got it totally right with that, if it ever changes it's going to suck."

Now, don't misconstrue this as me saying P2P is a superior solution to dedicated servers, because as I said there are clearly advantages to the latter, but it makes me wonder what will happen when something that is genuinely better comes along. Which eventually it will.

Aaaaaaaand that's enough responses for right now.

"Infinity Ward isn't blameless here, of course. Beyond axing the dedicated server support in the first place, company reps tried a strange song-and-dance routine where they pretended like this was a change made solely with the benefit of the gamer in mind, and even the most rational-minded PC gamer doesn't like having people try to yank the wool down over his eyes. This is a case where flat honestly may have been the best policy, and what was intended to calm the masses ended up just throwing fuel on a particularly bitter flame."

That right there is more or less the only reason y Im pissed now. If what they offer works than great. If not...

I don't feel entitled to Infinity Ward taking more effort in making MW2 for PC. What annoys me is that they are actively putting work in to make it worse. It's a lot more complicated and costly to set up IW.net and make modding impossible than it would be to use an old-fashioned, easy to use (after all, even 7 year olds manage to get onto servers without help) dedicated server browser and mod support. It's the clear effort they're putting in to make the game worse that perplexes and irritates me, not some sense of entitlement towards their labor. Why not put that effort into bringing consoles a truly superior system to matchmaking, thus evening out the gap between console and pc by dragging one up, not down.

That and a $10 price hike for no reason are what annoy me.

I have to agree with some of what John said (not all of it). We are entitled to a game that is quality and is worth 60$. If we don't think that game is worth that much, then we are not going to buy it. Simple. Were were trying to say that Infinity ward needed to make these changes to make it worth 60$, and that is fine, but they have fueled this flame war and conflict between PC gamers and Consoles. Consoles are calling us privileged pricks, and I highly doubt this little argument will go away. This will be used against PC gamers for years. While I highly doubt any other company will take away our dedicated servers on the PC, because I think Infinity ward is the only company that could pull this crap and get away with it, also they said this a month after release after all the hype, this argument will continue to give Xbox and other console gamers a reason to flame. This could also (maybe) lower the standards.

I love my console gamers that are intelligent, fun, and know that they are gamers, but they shouldn't barge in and start telling everyone what to do and that they are hardcore. This just reaffirms my standards and shows that the PC community can unite for a cause. If they really don't buy the game, then we have made a difference.

CantFaketheFunk:
1) Second, I'm not sure how you mean it's a "downgraded port." I think that if you have a gaming PC capable of playing MW2 on maximum, you'd be a fool to get it for any other platform. It'll still look better, it'll still control better, and you'll still be able to customize the gaming experience in ways you can't ever do on the console. It still outstrips the console versions by a good margin.

2) I think you're arguing against the wrong thing here. I'm not trying to say that people shouldn't be upset at the removal of these features. The thing that interests me - and that frankly irritates me - is the repeated suggestion that these people are angry at the idea of their version having anything to do with the mere console versions.

1) It'll look better and control better, I'll grant you that but the fact remains that Modern Warfare 2 is essentially a port of the console version. We don't get any more customization (gameplay wise) than console owners do.

2) In response to what I put in bold, PC gamers ARE angry that their version is like the consoles, and quite frankly, I think they have good reason to be. As I said on the previous page:

myself:
It is foolish and wrong to try and treat the PC audience the same as the console audience. Quite simply, they are entirely different consumer bases and as such have different expectations for their platform. For example, consoles have proven time and time again that matchmaking works just fine...for them. It has also been proven time and time again that matchmaking doesn't work on PC nearly as well.

The short and sweet of it is that PC gamers have come to expect a different experience than their console brethren and it's been that way for over a decade. It's a profound kick in the head for a developer to take away the very features that make the PC what it is and to tell us that we're better off for it. If I wanted to play the console version of Modern Warfare 2, I'd buy it for my Xbox 360.

CantFaketheFunk:

*snippity snip snip*

Now, don't misconstrue this as me saying P2P is a superior solution to dedicated servers, because as I said there are clearly advantages to the latter, but it makes me wonder what will happen when something that is genuinely better comes along. Which eventually it will.

Aaaaaaaand that's enough responses for right now.

When better tech comes along I would hope that we would embrace it and enjoy it. It's not like PC gamers are averse to spending money on new parts for their computers so I would think we would enjoy an even better solution than dedicated servers.
The problem here though is (as far as I see it) that P2P is not better tech. If anything the console players should be supportive of this and demand dedicated servers of their own, not bash us for complaining about removal of features. We get called elitist and arrogant and what not for wanting the best possible experience. I have a PS3 that I enjoy playing on for some single player games, but I can't (won't) play multiplayer on it as it's a horrible experience compared to my PC where I frequent an awesome community. Personally I want control over my own experience and that's why I think IW is pulling a dick move. And I think console players should be wanting the same things. Though I may be way off there. If so, enjoy the match making by all means, but why must you bash, insult and rage at PC gamers for wanting the best possible games? We pay money for our games after all.

To add insult to injury IW then touts text chat, mouse and graphics sliders as top notch features. Not really the best way to handle this whole mess. They remove features that frankly are the back bone of PC online gaming and glorify the little that remains. Game not balanced for leaning. (Am I the only one who finds that sentence hilarious by the way?)

Every time I play L4D I and my clan mates moan about the crippled match making system. And we even have our own damn servers and it's still a hassle to get a game going. TF2 is sweet though. I just jump on the server I want and play with my friends who happen to be on at that moment. That's gonna be hard to do with a match making system.

From the article::
What I don't understand - and what frankly has made me increasingly ashamed to call myself a PC gamer over the last few weeks - is the attitude. There is what seems to be a strong current of entitlement beneath it all, and the message from many of the protesters is clear: We deserve something above and beyond the call of duty (har har har) because we are PC gamers, and our platform of choice is special. In other words, "You owe us, Infinity Ward."

I don't believe this is the case. I believe the appeal in PC gaming has always been about the technological advantage. Some may take that as a point of pride, which can be VERY obnoxious, but I think most of us appreciate the heightened experience.

And the advantage of dedicated servers isn't purely technical, either. With a dedicated server there is always a central location for a group to meet, and that can as the foundation of strong gaming communities.

Think of dedicated servers as your local bar (let's call it a pub!) Match-making is equivalent to the local Wal-Mart. Both sell beer. Everyone and their neighbor goes to Wal-Mart, gets what they want, and they leave. Almost zero connections are made at Wal-Mart. The pub is completely different, some people come and go, some stick around for a little while, but a couple people keep coming back. A community develops around the regulars at that pub.

When I'm playing TF2 on my 360, I may see the same players from game to game but there's no acknowledgement. We just happen to be drifting down the same isle in the same supermarket. When I get home and can fire up TF2 on my PC, I'll be heading back to my ol' favorites list, and it's a good feeling to know that some of those players will remember me and welcome me back.

My problem with losing dedicated servers in modern games isn't as much about the technological implications, it's about the social ones.

Great article, but its not all that true

I could care less about call of duty, but what IW did is really a stab at PC gaming for a reason that I just don't get.

sgtshock:
So he's basically saying "Yeah, it sucks that MW2 won't have dedicated servers or other features, just don't be so pretentious about it?" I guess I agree, although I understand why people are getting so angry. Like he said, PC gaming isn't a dominant market, so the outnumbered PC gamers feel like they need to be loud to be heard, even if it comes off as whiny.

And like Nimbus said, it's not like they're paying less attention to a smaller market. They are specifically changing the PC multiplayer system from what it used to be to something almost universally considered inferior. Infinity Ward and Activision are two video game giants. Many feel that they will open the gateway for more developers dropping dedicated servers, perhaps changing the face of PC gaming as we know it.

And therefore ruining fps multi player on PC forever. Dropping deticated server support is a mistake, and saying that it will be 'better' when it clearly is not is an even bigger mistake. I don't care if they don't make a game for PC, if they don't want to they just shouldn't not give us some PR drivel.

The reasons for dropping dedicated server support are fairly clear:

1. Most users cannot host a decent server as their upstream bandwidth is far to limited by ISP's not to mention the fact that running any form of 'server' is against most users ISP contracts.

2. Not having a server browser means you will almost always be playing with 'random' players.

3. 9 vs 9 player teams is the max, (for the very same reason as 1.) but even with that as the max, I can tell you right now most users will not be able to host a game that large.

The_root_of_all_evil:
I had a long detailed and reasonable post to put up, but Firefox crashed and lost it.

I'll drop it to three sentences.

We're not all elitists. We just want to stop the programmed obsolescence before it starts, and removing 15 year old standards without a reason stinks as bad as dropping licences that won't spawn sequels.
What does a PC owner do, who wasn't going to buy MW, when he knows that it will become a business model that others will use?

you've already bolded what i wanted to say: I wasn't going to buy MW2, i know my lil' brother IS going to get it this X-mas,(360) and I will almost certainly play it, and i have no doubt it will be somewhat fun, but what IW has demonstrated the past several weeks is scary, and i HOPE that others do not follow them, otherwise it will seem as though i will always just be playing CS & BF, until they too succumb (a very dark day) to the logic behind this shit.
I have no delusions that the system makes sense from their point of view, but i still have the right to hate what it means to ME

I think part of what makes PC gamers sore is that, in the past (and actually, in this case too, if I'm not mistaken), we haven't gotten the same thing as what other consoles get. We get something worse. Read: no co-op, no DLC in the majority of cases, huge delays in comparison to the console version, etc.

The issue is that we lose out on a lot of the strengths of the consoles, but usually there's been something to make up for that. True, graphics and the superior control system help, but that's just something fundamental to the console, just like support for an XBox 360 controller is something you should expect any 360 game to have. It's not a perk, it's a necessity.

So when we're told that features we've always anticipated having on a PC FPS like this (dedicated servers, large numbers of players allowed in multiplayer, console commands, no ability to kick someone out of a multiplayer game, etc) are completely unsupported, and also that we're expected to pay more than usual for the "privilege" of playing such a reduced game, it grates the nerves. Unfortunately, some of our PC brethren aren't exactly the best at articulating it, and there's no excuse for that.

That said, I think you're completely out of line here for attacking PC gamers, Funk... or at least out of line in saying these complaints are unfounded. The game is well below the level of quality we've seen in any other AAA game recently, and the only answer anyone has seen as to why is "because the game isn't balanced for that". It's a Neanderthal in everything but cost, and an absolute insult in that.

CantFaketheFunk:

Not... really. In comparison to, say, COD4, maybe. But it isn't like there's stuff on the console version that they are actively withholding from the PC version.

Co-op called.

I've been a console gamer since the Playstation days. I've never cared for keyboard+mouse controls for FPS because of the most overlooked flaw in PC gameing; the keyboard. The mouse is fine, although I have gotten used to the resistance of an analog. The keyboard just doesn't feel very natural for movement after ten years of using an analog. I often forget what keys do what and lose hand position (though that's more of an issue with me than the input method).

CantFaketheFunk:

Cheeze_Pavilion:

If PC gamers were complaining about consoles getting a feature in a sequel that was only available to the PC in the first game, that would be entitlement. When did it become 'entitlement' to complain about things being taken away from you?

I think you're arguing against the wrong thing here. I'm not trying to say that people shouldn't be upset at the removal of these features. The thing that interests me - and that frankly irritates me - is the repeated suggestion that these people are angry at the idea of their version having anything to do with the mere console versions.

Maybe you're just seeing different examples of complaints than I am, but, I don't see too many people angry at the idea of their version having anything to do with the mere console versions.

I see people mad at being *downgraded* to a mere console version, but, I don't see how you can call that being angry at "having anything to do with." Wouldn't that be being mad at console versions being *upgraded* to PC levels?

Just like the fact that you have a moral problem with piracy and not with boycotts doesn't mean they will have a different impact on the decisions of profit-driven corporations, the fact that you see asking for dedicated servers as an entitlement while asking for equal mulitplayer in Borderlands as justified will have no bearing on how companies behave.

Well, I suppose that stems from me thinking pirates are tools, and a boycott is perfectly legal within the confines of the law. I think that if you find that a game is not worth the asking price, you shouldn't buy it - but that also means you shouldn't get to play it.

Sure, and some people don't believe in condoms because they don't believe in premarital sex, but that doesn't mean condoms are useless in preventing the transmission of AIDS. You're engaging in similar thinking if you believe that because pirates are tools and boycotts are legal that there's a difference when it comes to the decisions of profit-driven corporations.

Now, if your conclusions stem from a belief about how video game companies are IRRATIONALLY influenced by piracy numbers, or that video game companies are concerned with PR and will find it harder to shrug off a respectful boycott in a way that doesn't drive down stock prices, that's different.

vivaldiscool:
Funk, entitlement doesn't mean what you think it means.

Entitlement isn't even a word that applies in consumer culture. The entitlement argument could be an argument against piracy, but for someone who's shelling out $60 for the game, they are perfectly entitled to say we want a good game. If the dev was making it for free, and we complained, that would be entitlement.

In summation, you say dedicated servers are a good thing, but we paying customers are not entitled to them.

funk:
Gamers don't deserve good games

This isn't fucking altruism funk, the devs are getting payed for this, we give them our money, we are entitled to the best game they can make. That's the basic concept of capitalism.

Fair enough point, but there is a big problem with it. Nobody is forcing you to buy or play this game. As Funk said, if you were to have paid the $60 and then found out about all this, that is when you're argument can easily come into play unopposed. And I don't know, maybe you pre-ordered it before all this came out, in which place then I can see your anger. But the fact remains, until that is the situation, Activision isn't entitled to do anything for you. It's recommended they do so if they want to get anywhere, but they don't have to. Which is why you do the one thing you can. Buy other games. By supporting other games that still include all these features you hold near and dear, maybe Activision will get the message that these things are indeed important to the PC gaming experience. Or maybe they won't. And that's when the real focus of Capitalism will kick in, the real lesson it will teach them. Their sales will begin to deteriorate. Sure, maybe the PC version of MW2 wouldn't have been that large anyway, but it will still be money missed out on. Money going to other companies. And then maybe, as Activision starts wondering where there PC based profits have gone, they'll see what it is. And then they'll understand.

/rant

CorpBlitz:
snip
The reasons for dropping dedicated server support are fairly clear:

1. Most users cannot host a decent server as their upstream bandwidth is far to limited by ISP's not to mention the fact that running any form of 'server' is against most users ISP contracts.

2. Not having a server browser means you will almost always be playing with 'random' players.

3. 9 vs 9 player teams is the max, (for the very same reason as 1.) but even with that as the max, I can tell you right now most users will not be able to host a game that large.

I have mid range dsl and I host matches on halo cod4 16 players perfectly fine. So surely the other millions with 30x faster cable modems would be fine.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here