Here's to hoping that these guys start a boycott.

Then they can compete with the L4D2 boycotters to see who can make more people roll their eyes in disgust!

I was planning on getting Modern Warfare regardless, but I still feel bad for the PC players. Picking servers never felt that hard, I'm semi-new to playing online on both consoles and PCs; they seem the about the same, with the servers in a small lead. They should be petitioning to get MW2 to support mods, in my opinion, that's way more important in a PC game's life.

ygetoff:

teh_gunslinger:

ygetoff:
Wow. No offense, but this really only helps to reinforce the whole PC stereotype.

WlknCntrdiction:
A console gamer wouldn't know the first thing about troubleshooting, because they want it nice and simple, and dumb.

This doesn't help.
MM has it's flaws, but Mr. Funk has a point. Try it. If it turns out to be the death of all video games (which it probably won't, given that consoles use it and we all have fun, too), then you can all say, "We told you so."

No, he has no point I think. Why down grade to a lame system and then wait for it to fail? Why implement it in the first place. He would have a point if it was a better system. It is genuinely not. Dedicated servers will beat MM and private matches any time when it comes to creating communities and playing with people you like. I don't need to bloat my Steam friends list just to find my regular playing friends. I just hit the favourite button in the server list and log on to the server I want. There is always some guys around I know.

What if it doesn't fail? Like I said before, it works just fine on consoles.

My point is kinda that it may work on consoles but if I wanted a gimped multiplayer system I'd play on a console. There is a reason I don't. I think it is a horrible way to do it. So I play on my pc when I wanna go online and only use the PS3 for sp stuff.

Why would I be assed to run a host on a common house hold line when a dedicated server gets lower ping, circumvents problems if a dev only has servers in the US and allows me to join a community. Why would I spam people with game invites to join a damn private match when there could be a server ready for any and all who wants to play. With an invite system I'm dependent on my friends wanting to play when I want. Lord knows it's bad enough in L4D as it is.

A dedicated server also makes for a longer life for a game as it's not dependent on when Bobby Kotick pulls the plug. And of I know him that will be sooner rather than later.

But it may be well and good for consoles but it's far to crappy for me. And that may in the eyes of some make me elitist. So be it.

internetzealot1:
Here's to hoping that these guys start a boycott.

Then they can compete with the L4D2 boycotters to see who can make more people roll their eyes in disgust!

They're way ahead of you. 1000 members and counting.

http://steamcommunity.com/groups/BOYCOTTMW2

noobface:

internetzealot1:
Here's to hoping that these guys start a boycott.

Then they can compete with the L4D2 boycotters to see who can make more people roll their eyes in disgust!

They're way ahead of you. 1000 members and counting.

http://steamcommunity.com/groups/BOYCOTTMW2

[Sighs]...Eyes rolling.

ahh. so now that the LFD2 ban is over, the gaming community will start right off the bat with a "MW2 petinion. ah lovely, predictable people.

teh_gunslinger:

ygetoff:

teh_gunslinger:

ygetoff:
Wow. No offense, but this really only helps to reinforce the whole PC stereotype.

WlknCntrdiction:
A console gamer wouldn't know the first thing about troubleshooting, because they want it nice and simple, and dumb.

This doesn't help.
MM has it's flaws, but Mr. Funk has a point. Try it. If it turns out to be the death of all video games (which it probably won't, given that consoles use it and we all have fun, too), then you can all say, "We told you so."

No, he has no point I think. Why down grade to a lame system and then wait for it to fail? Why implement it in the first place. He would have a point if it was a better system. It is genuinely not. Dedicated servers will beat MM and private matches any time when it comes to creating communities and playing with people you like. I don't need to bloat my Steam friends list just to find my regular playing friends. I just hit the favourite button in the server list and log on to the server I want. There is always some guys around I know.

What if it doesn't fail? Like I said before, it works just fine on consoles.

My point is kinda that it may work on consoles but if I wanted a gimped multiplayer system I'd play on a console. There is a reason I don't. I think it is a horrible way to do it. So I play on my pc when I wanna go online and only use the PS3 for sp stuff.

Why would I be assed to run a host on a common house hold line when a dedicated server gets lower ping, circumvents problems if a dev only has servers in the US and allows me to join a community. Why would I spam people with game invites to join a damn private match when there could be a server ready for any and all who wants to play. With an invite system I'm dependent on my friends wanting to play when I want. Lord knows it's bad enough in L4D as it is.

A dedicated server also makes for a longer life for a game as it's not dependent on when Bobby Kotick pulls the plug. And of I know him that will be sooner rather than later.

But it may be well and good for consoles but it's far to crappy for me. And that may in the eyes of some make me elitist. So be it.

Matchmaking works on consoles just as well as on PC, poorly IMO. I will give up my communities dedicated servers kicking and screaming. I have a group of people I like to play with, I know them in real life and online. I always find them on the server we go to and when we start playing its way more fun. You know lan parties? I love those and so do they, you can have low lag be in person and show off. Knowing the person you are killing makes it oh so much more satisfying.

I play PC for options. If you are making a feature, don't force it onto everyone. I love having choices, but I don't like having freedom taken away. I can't believe they dropped mod support though. MOD SUPPORT. Games that don't allow this die painful deaths after things get stale, unlike, for example, Unreal Tournament.

Devs need to change way matches are arranged to the platform they will be played on. I think everyone on console would love to have dedicated servers, you have less lag and ability to have more players. I don't like being able to see netcode in effect when I play a game. Getting shot from behind walls because of lag correction for example.

4RT1LL3RY:

teh_gunslinger:

ygetoff:

teh_gunslinger:

ygetoff:
Wow. No offense, but this really only helps to reinforce the whole PC stereotype.

WlknCntrdiction:
A console gamer wouldn't know the first thing about troubleshooting, because they want it nice and simple, and dumb.

This doesn't help.
MM has it's flaws, but Mr. Funk has a point. Try it. If it turns out to be the death of all video games (which it probably won't, given that consoles use it and we all have fun, too), then you can all say, "We told you so."

No, he has no point I think. Why down grade to a lame system and then wait for it to fail? Why implement it in the first place. He would have a point if it was a better system. It is genuinely not. Dedicated servers will beat MM and private matches any time when it comes to creating communities and playing with people you like. I don't need to bloat my Steam friends list just to find my regular playing friends. I just hit the favourite button in the server list and log on to the server I want. There is always some guys around I know.

What if it doesn't fail? Like I said before, it works just fine on consoles.

My point is kinda that it may work on consoles but if I wanted a gimped multiplayer system I'd play on a console. There is a reason I don't. I think it is a horrible way to do it. So I play on my pc when I wanna go online and only use the PS3 for sp stuff.

Why would I be assed to run a host on a common house hold line when a dedicated server gets lower ping, circumvents problems if a dev only has servers in the US and allows me to join a community. Why would I spam people with game invites to join a damn private match when there could be a server ready for any and all who wants to play. With an invite system I'm dependent on my friends wanting to play when I want. Lord knows it's bad enough in L4D as it is.

A dedicated server also makes for a longer life for a game as it's not dependent on when Bobby Kotick pulls the plug. And of I know him that will be sooner rather than later.

But it may be well and good for consoles but it's far to crappy for me. And that may in the eyes of some make me elitist. So be it.

Matchmaking works on consoles just as well as on PC, poorly IMO. I will give up my communities dedicated servers kicking and screaming. I have a group of people I like to play with, I know them in real life and online. I always find them on the server we go to and when we start playing its way more fun. You know lan parties? I love those and so do they, you can have low lag be in person and show off. Knowing the person you are killing makes it oh so much more satisfying.

I play PC for options. If you are making a feature, don't force it onto everyone. I love having choices, but I don't like having freedom taken away. I can't believe they dropped mod support though. MOD SUPPORT. Games that don't allow this die painful deaths after things get stale, unlike, for example, Unreal Tournament.

Devs need to change way matches are arranged to the platform they will be played on. I think everyone on console would love to have dedicated servers, you have less lag and ability to have more players. I don't like being able to see netcode in effect when I play a game. Getting shot from behind walls because of lag correction for example.

I've read your post a couple of times now... We agree, right? Dedicated servers is the superior way to go and all that jazz?

CantFaketheFunk:

At first glance, this seemed to be - and on some level, continues to seem to be - a classic example of "They Changed It, Now It Sucks."

Oh god no... I was like, "It's from Tv Tropes, isn't it?"
AND BAM!
It is.

Yes, everyone loves dedicated servers. People I know on console wish they could have dedicated servers. They also loved L4D because of this, even if they were hosted by Valve, dedicated is dedicated. They want low lag.

One of the communities I'm in, NoobToob, host events in games. We always run out of room in the xbox events, we also run out of room at the PC events but we can get twice the people in. Its a lot more hectic on the PC because of this, but the main rule Don't Be A Dick, prevents most of them, no one using martyrdom is also great. But the main thing we love about the PC events is we don't have to just do the same DM all the time. We switch it up with zombie and onslaught mods. I wish consoles could support mods better, like UT3 on PS3.

In summary dedicated servers are great because they let you have a constant ping, lower lag, custom gamemodes and more players.
Mods are great because they let you have fresh experience even after a long time with the game.
Losing both of them is a major hit to PC gaming in any title.

CantFaketheFunk:

At first glance, this seemed to be - and on some level, continues to seem to be - a classic example of "They Changed It, Now It Sucks." I could understand the furor over the lack of mods, since mods are always fun, but - of all things - complaining because we're not using traditional server technology? Are all FPS games going to have to have a server browser from now until the end of time? What happens when genuinely better tech comes along?

Let's face the music, PC gamers: Server browsers are usually clunky and unintuitive. In trying to teach a (non-PC-gaming) friend how to play TF2, the first twenty or so minutes were just spent on how to sort through and select a server. I know that we PC gamers like to think of ourselves as an exclusive little club of special kids who hold high reign above those console lowlifes, but really? Are people really complaining about a more easily accessible game with modern matchmaking technology?

I was about to conclude with something along the lines of "At least the StarCraft LAN complainers actually had at least one valid point," but then PC Gamer's Tim Edwards threw his hat into the ring. The two incontrovertible points there seem to be "they make moderation easier to enforce" (as long as the players providing the servers are dedicated) and "they create communities." Even then: It might be true that they create little insular communities (even if I'd be willing to bet most gamers just pick servers primarily based on map/ping/how full they are), but couldn't one argue that Infinity Ward is simply trying to make one larger community?

In the end, though, this is just sound and fury, signifying nothing. Infinity Ward will probably not be swayed, Modern Warfare 2 will come out as planned, everyone who hemmed and hawed over this will still buy the game (though they'll still complain) and it will sell a hojillion bazillion copies.

The problem PC gamers have with the exclusion of dedicated server browsers doesn't stem from resistance to any change in our server browsers-it stems from reduced multiplayer functionality in a highly anticipated AAA title. I doubt anyone would object to the addition of matchmaking and official servers alongside dedicated servers and a traditional browser, or a new browser format that makes finding servers more accessible for new gamers. We are, however, frustrated to see features that have been standard in multiplayer shooters for a decade left out, especially in a game facing a PC-exclusive delay and an unusually high price tag.

I doubt that IW will create a 'larger community' through the elimination of dedicated servers. Clans and gaming groups are integral to PC gaming, and the inability to host private servers will discourage them from becoming active players of MW2. This will lead, if anything, to a smaller community, and one which is missing an important segment of gamers. It is, frankly, a slap in the face to the gamers who are the most active in supporting PC gaming as a platform and a community to remove dedicated server support.

It's even more worrying to take the removal of these features in context. As I mentioned previously, MW2 is already facing the now-traditional 2-week delay for PC and launching at $60 as opposed to the usual $50. The removal of dedicated server and mod support represents two more salvos against the status quo of PC gaming-with no silver lining save for what seems to be more of the excellent gameplay seen in the first Modern Warfare. Unfortunately, you're probably right that the game will sell quite well despite these handicaps. I worry that if publishers, including Activision's competitors, see Modern Warfare 2 and others selling well despite raised prices, delays, and missing features, that they'll replicate these 'innovations' in future titles.

In the grand scheme of things, a single late, expensive, and feature-crippled game isn't a major problem. 2010 will have its own big multiplayer shooter and we'll all forget about this. If sales for MW2 are strong, though, we might get more of the same from next fall's blockbuster, as well.

Petition is already at "112508 Total Signatures" and growing.

Chipperz:

Also, I've just had a thought - if Console gamers had to put up withthe quagmire of server selection, we'd be told to suck it up and deal with it. Why is it not OK to do it the other way round?

It wouldn't happen. That's not the point. We're not trying to force our ideals for a GREAT MP experience on the consoles. Just keep the console interfaces and matchmaking systems out of the PC. Every game thus far has turned out to be utter crap when they proclaimed "bringing the console experience to PC gamers". We never wanted that experience, it's horrible and player to player hosting is horrendous for numerous reasons. The Consoles are incapable of supporting Dedicated Servers to the extent that PC relies on them. IW doesn't seem to understand the frustration behind it....

Have they not played Rainbow Six Vegas 1 and 2 for the PC? FEAR2? Gears of War? These are games off the top of my head that were multi platformed and all promised "best of quality for search function", all of the above failed. The search function, no matter how much they want it to work; fails. FEAR2 had an agonizing process. Finding servers on TF2 is definitely easier than you could find servers on FEAR2 and I feel IW.Net wont do much different. I don't have any confidence in this since the examples thus far have proven very unfavorable to the current games in existence such as CoD4 (ironically) and TF2. New players to the PC market may have a hard time with how server search works but it's relatively easy and less tedious once you learn the setup of the layout.

All IW.Net is going to give us is a search function that requires tedious window clicking to get what we want; when it could easily be simplified by simply allowing PC players to have their own hub. The game is going to use STEAM, let STEAM have priority of sever files; I understand the achievements and stats but if IW wasn't confident in giving us DSs... they should of just paired completely with Steam.

Bowling pretty much mocked the modder community. A community that Valve loves as seen in TF2. VAC wont stop hacking either, it still goes on in TF2. As of right now I've lost confidence in CoDMW2's MP support; it's as if they don't really care about the competitive market of the PC. There's no reason for this stupidity, instead of admitting they have no understanding they turn around and give us falsified information about what went on with CoD4. Yes the game was pirated, it wasn't pirated by 60% - that's a lot and giving pirating too much credit.

In the end, there's so many factors that come down to PC online gaming. Ping matters and there's a lot of variables that can and do affect ping. Distance from ISP, distance from host, ISP In/Out rates, host in/out rates, ISPs (I use Verizon FIOS, host may use Packbell DSL), etc. Dedicated Servers cut these problems in half by making it easier for a host to display a consistent game to the best of their abilities; it was a necessity for gaming online and especially for competitive gaming. The Modders, competitors, etc; all have been greatly underestimated here.

Izerous:
Petition is already at "112508 Total Signatures" and growing.

Yeah but they already posted their response and ignorantly so. I'm ashamed of IW, I wasn't expecting them to defend themselves with pointless and falsified information and/or assumptions.

Lancer723:

Mornelithe:
Never planned on buying MW2 anyway. Maybe when they reskin it as a WW2 era FPS.

You mean World at War?

OT:
What does it matter? As long as the transitions from host to host are smooth, then really why is it a big deal that the servers aren't dedicated? It just seems like people are complaining because they don't wan their precious PC gaming to resemble its console brethren.

It'd be World at War 2, but same difference. There's plenty of material still left to cover from that conflict.

Frank_Sinatra_:

If you graduate to a PC then you must be going to a community college.
Since when was the PC some godly thing that only the best can use? I game on my PC and I prefer a console.
Plus if you had listened to IW they said they were going to make the game balanced for all, and if that includes PCs then so be it.
Really all of you PC people bitching makes you look childish and me glad that I'm not a hardcore PC gamer.

thanks for not seeing the point XD
Im telling you their reason for doing this has nothing to do with it being a better or worst system, it everything to do with which is easiest for them to port. Yeah just keep thinking they have the end user in mind when they pulled this wool over your eye.

Glad you like your console more too, i love the games i have my console. but wen it comes to FPS the mouse and keyboard >> controller. (not to mention lack of autoaim kinda requires some skill) Glad to see you like to live a sheltered life where any challenge is GOD FORBID existant in the world.

CantFaketheFunk:

What happens when genuinely better tech comes along?

So you are saying that this is a better solution?

To me it seems like a jump backwards. No one will be able to host their own private servers, which will most likely be a big obstacle for people wanting to play with a clan.

Griefers and assholes will have free reign since there won't be any server admins.

Quite frankly, I personally don't like to just be tossed into a random server.

And don't get me started on the lag...

Matchmaking is a scourge that needs to die. I honestly don't see what advantages it has over traditional server browsing, other then being moron friendly. Ok, yeah, I went there. It's just trying to be MORON FRIENDLY. I don't know where the heck you get the idea it could take someone twenty friggin minutes to learn how to pick a server! I mean jesus, how old are these friends of yours?

What is appealing about not being able to pick which maps you want, which weapon sets you prefer, what rules you like, not being able to join a server that provides a fairly low ping, not being able to join games that have room for your friends, and so on and so forth? The list goes on and on.

I suppose next people are going to start complaining that the startup menus in games are too complicated. "Waaaah, I can't figure out what all this stuff means! What the heck is a 'load game'?! And why would I want a 'new game'? I just bought this one!"
Ok, we'll make it so instead of all those complicated options, we'll just have one button, that you can press and then it'll randomly pick from all the possible things you might want to do. Sometimes it might start a new game, maybe it'll load, or if you're lucky it might take you to the options screen. And the options will be locked so you don't accidentally mess anything up.

For the love of god, this is what gaming is coming to? We can't even pick a friggin SERVER without computers helping? Does the computer know what I want better then I do?

robert632:
ahh. so now that the LFD2 ban is over, the gaming community will start right off the bat with a "MW2 petinion. ah lovely, predictable people.

So is apathy the correct response then?

At the moment, none of us know what the true PC online MW2 experience will be like.
However, if it resembles the current MW1 console system I will not be purchasing it.

This is a boycott of love if anything else.
"We loved your first game infinity ward, let us tell you why."

I like servers because I can play with people from a specific clan, without belonging to that clan.

For instance, I've played on about three servers of TF2 that weren't Lotus Clan. About 98% of all my time is sent on their servers, because of their decent moderation, ping, and sometimes my steam-friends play there too. It provides a consistent and enjoyable experience.

Take away the player's choice for what server they join? No, thanks!

I was thinking about MW2, but I can now say with compete certainty that I'll pass it up for one of the maelstrom of titles that are coming out soon.

DTWolfwood:

Frank_Sinatra_:

If you graduate to a PC then you must be going to a community college.
Since when was the PC some godly thing that only the best can use? I game on my PC and I prefer a console.
Plus if you had listened to IW they said they were going to make the game balanced for all, and if that includes PCs then so be it.
Really all of you PC people bitching makes you look childish and me glad that I'm not a hardcore PC gamer.

thanks for not seeing the point XD
Im telling you their reason for doing this has nothing to do with it being a better or worst system, it everything to do with which is easiest for them to port. Yeah just keep thinking they have the end user in mind when they pulled this wool over your eye.

Glad you like your console more too, i love the games i have my console. but wen it comes to FPS the mouse and keyboard >> controller. (not to mention lack of autoaim kinda requires some skill) Glad to see you like to live a sheltered life where any challenge is GOD FORBID existant in the world.

You said that this decision was based on the game being easy to port.
Really?
Could it not simply be that dedicated servers notoriously run user made content.
Content that would not exist if there was not a server to run it on.
Which means all further content will be solely from Infinity Ward.
This isn't about things being easy, this is about money.

I'm sure someone has already pointed this out though.

I think they got this the wrong way around; they should have added dedicated servers to consoles, not remove them from PC's. It really was the only thing I felt was lacking from CoD 4's multiplayer, since the matches just felt too small and restricted.

I'm still gonna buy it, though. I'm not outraged, just surprised.

I'm probably not the only one who's cancelled their pre-order on MW2 because of this, I'm sure all 112508(at last count)of those who have signed the petition have done likewise, and many many more besides, only way anything will change is to hit them where it really hurts, their wallets, any PC gamer worth their salt will not stand for this tbh, it's counter productive and it's backwards thinking, it's not even logical on any level.
Also with their lastest response IW have basically just given us a massive "fuck you, deal with it", fuck. that.

So how are we going to play with mates? Unless they do the Xbox/Windows live thing where you have all your mates names and can connect to their server (which i wouldn't mind). Also is it a little bit to hard to ask for both? A sought of quick match thing or alternatively you can sought through the servers, which i don't believe is that difficult to begin with...

GoldenRaz:
I think they got this the wrong way around; they should have added dedicated servers to consoles, not remove them from PC's. It really was the only thing I felt was lacking from CoD 4's multiplayer, since the matches just felt too small and restricted.

I'm still gonna buy it, though. I'm not outraged, just surprised.

I guess the problem with adding dedicated servers to consoles games is the server modding aspect which could easily alienate the casual gamer. This is kind of what they are getting at in the article - not fragmenting the community.

The fail point may be in casting the same design rules on both console and PC versions. These are two very diverse communities and they should be treated independantly.

I do wonder how their infrastructure will stand up to the 'gazillion' gamers they predict will buy the game though and with the game being peer to peer I'd hope there's still statistical tracking to a central server otherwise all sorts of hacking will occur!

felltablet:

You said that this decision was based on the game being easy to port.
Really?
Could it not simply be that dedicated servers notoriously run user made content.
Content that would not exist if there was not a server to run it on.
Which means all further content will be solely from Infinity Ward.
This isn't about things being easy, this is about money.

I'm sure someone has already pointed this out though.

Good point!

yes its implicit in my 'easier' comment that it would be more money for them XD but thanks for getting it ^_^ (More or less you make 1 game with 1 set of function and port it 3 ways, will be cheaper to develop than making it different on another platform.)

Ladies, gentlemen and console peasants:

Learn the difference.

junkmanuk:

GoldenRaz:
I think they got this the wrong way around; they should have added dedicated servers to consoles, not remove them from PC's. It really was the only thing I felt was lacking from CoD 4's multiplayer, since the matches just felt too small and restricted.

I'm still gonna buy it, though. I'm not outraged, just surprised.

I guess the problem with adding dedicated servers to consoles games is the server modding aspect which could easily alienate the casual gamer. This is kind of what they are getting at in the article - not fragmenting the community.

The fail point may be in casting the same design rules on both console and PC versions. These are two very diverse communities and they should be treated independantly.

I do wonder how their infrastructure will stand up to the 'gazillion' gamers they predict will buy the game though and with the game being peer to peer I'd hope there's still statistical tracking to a central server otherwise all sorts of hacking will occur!

While wanting to create one, big, cozy community is commendable, I still don't see how forcing "hardcorers" to play with "casuals" is the right way to do so. It's more likely that casual players will constantly find themselves being harassed by one of the more douche-y hardcore players, which definitely would alienate casuals, than for everybody to get along perfectly. I don't see why it would hurt to let those in for the competition play against eachother on their own servers while everyone who just want to have some fun plays on one of the matchmaking servers.
Maybe that could be solved with two categories of matchmaking, something like "Standard Match" and "Competition", I don't know.

If they can't add it to consoles due to the differences between the platforms, then it would be somewhat clarifiying if they just went ahead and said it, instead of making it seem like they took the easy way out. But that's just me thinking out loud.

I'm with you in hoping that they'll be able to get all the information from matches sent to a central servers, otherwise it would cripple the whole "create a big community" agenda. I mean, it doesn't feel like a community if everything you just did was completely erased from all records the minute the match ends.

Bitch, bitch, moan, moan. Why on earth are people getting worked up about this? Can someone explain why this game is meant to be so fan-friggin'-tasic? It's another War FPS, to add to the hundreds that are already out there. May be I suffer from 'Originality disease' or something, but I am, honest to God, sick of hearing about MW2.

/rant. Sorry, but I've needed to get that off my chest and hopefully someone will agree with my little piece of common sense.

I'm sure it's been said before, but I might as well add my thoughts.

The primary draw for PC gaming for me was that dedicated servers assisted the formation of communities. Especially when using 3rd party server browsers such as All-Seeing Eye (though that died when Yahoo bought it as I recall) and X-Fire it made it quite simple to find a server matching your specific requirements.
For example, I used to play Battlefield 1942/2 pretty much every night after college. You could find servers setup for very specific qualities, like having a small map rotation with say, only city maps, friendly fire on/off and all that. If that wasn't your cup of tea you could always use the official EA servers.
In-game server browsers, I found, have generally been very poor. Developers haven't really made much effort to improve these over the years, with the exception of Steam, which atleast has filters for server location, ping, maps etc which by now, should be a standard I would have thought.
During my time with the Battlefield series, I always found servers that suited my play style and went back to the same few every night. It's great getting to know the people who frequent them and building up a bit of rivalry or team spirit!

These days I am sad to say, I'm primarily a console gamer. I stick to my 360 as that's what most of my friends have and every game you join, it's always random people, usually with either no-one on voice comms, or someone abusing it in some manner. Not to mention I always seem to get grouped with Americans (no offense, but I would prefer to play with UK gamers).

As for mod support, I don't really understand this move either. Imagine if Valve never had modding tools for Half-Life. No Counter-strike, Day of Defeat, Natural Selection etc etc.

Anyway, this post has gone on a bit longer than I had expected so I shall take the time to read through the rest of the thread ;_;

well I did hate how every server was a dumb hardcore server

Talendra:
I have no problem at all with matchmaking, in fact I encourage it to help those who jsut want to join a game.

Do you know what a peer 2 peer architecture means??? Have you heard of a little game called WarRock?

Let me tell you about WarRock. It's a fantastic FPS game. However, they rely on P2P instead of hosted servers. To make a connection between all the players, the packages has to be sent from each player to each oher player - both ways. Meaning that if there is ONE Portuguese/Spanish/Italian person with a crappy connection in the room (I use them as an example since they have the worst continental connection in the civilized world, and are ofthen found to be the sinners in WarRock) EVERYBODY is going to lag.

They will lag for maybe the first 1, 3, 10 rounds - and maybe even the entire game.

In WarRock, the actual people making the lag happen will be invisible to most others to which their ping is more than 999. That means they have a huge advantage and will rise in ranks fastest - not because they are skilled but because they are invisible and make everyone else lag.

Signature #121095 done.

duckfi8:
well I did hate how every server was a dumb hardcore server

May I ask, what is "dumb" about a server running Hardcore?

Metalhandkerchief:

Talendra:
I have no problem at all with matchmaking, in fact I encourage it to help those who jsut want to join a game.

Do you know what a peer 2 peer architecture means??? Have you heard of a little game called WarRock?

Let me tell you about WarRock. It's a fantastic FPS game. However, they rely on P2P instead of hosted servers. To make a connection between all the players, the packages has to be sent from each player to each oher player - both ways. Meaning that if there is ONE Portuguese/Spanish/Italian person with a crappy connection in the room (I use them as an example since they have the worst continental connection in the civilized world, and are ofthen found to be the sinners in WarRock) EVERYBODY is going to lag.

They will lag for maybe the first 1, 3, 10 rounds - and maybe even the entire game.

In WarRock, the actual people making the lag happen will be invisible to most others to which their ping is more than 999. That means they have a huge advantage and will rise in ranks fastest - not because they are skilled but because they are invisible and make everyone else lag.

Signature #121095 done.

Did you even read my entire post before you decided to bitch about what I said. I am against p2p, in fact I messaged John so that people would know about this.
Read past my first sentence if you want to comment on what I say.

Radelaide:
Bitch, bitch, moan, moan. Why on earth are people getting worked up about this? Can someone explain why this game is meant to be so fan-friggin'-tasic? It's another War FPS, to add to the hundreds that are already out there. May be I suffer from 'Originality disease' or something, but I am, honest to God, sick of hearing about MW2.

/rant. Sorry, but I've needed to get that off my chest and hopefully someone will agree with my little piece of common sense.

It's not about how good the game is, it's about these pricks taking out useful and interesting features that makes online gaming so much better.

Would you like it if they decided to take out features you liked or make you pay more for the full game? There isn't much we can do about it except sign the petition, it's not like we have to much effort into signing it.

Kalezian:

Dedicated Servers = less ping! : Yes, they do, Im not going to lie about that as I even search for low ping servers in every game I play.
Counter-Point Internet Connections : If your afraid of not having a good connection, shouldnt you get a better ISP or even a higher bandwidth? Even with a eight-meg. connection I still have good pings on 87% of all servers I search for. And with/if this game uses the CoD4 matchmaking, it will always choose the person that can continue the match best, so yet again, Im not seeing why this is a big deal.

OBJECTION!
How about those that want to play MW2 outside of America, hm? If the MW2 servers are only based in America and/or Europe, then what about gamers like me, who live in Australia, where eight meg connections are a pipe dream? Are we supposed to just suck it up and pay money for a short single player campaign and badly laggy online? No thanks.