This is not the way to stimulate PC game sales you morons!

Fasckira:
Carmack admits hes glad someone else is attempting it first, meaning hes aware its a rubbish move and not exactly popular ... so whys he evening considering it? I really would love to be a fly on the wall in the board room meetings where they keep deciding that dropping dedicated servers would be a great idea, just to understand their logic-train.

Well if IWnet will FAIL (like in operation flashpoint 2) thrn he will be forced to admit that dedicated server are better. I make a promise that if IWnet will be rubish than even Carmack won't get away that easy just because he said early.

As the truth is p2p isn't ready and no one in earth can say it is as the ISP infrastructure is rubish for this task and will be for the next 5-10 years. And please don't anyone say that it works on console as it doesn't I worked in ISP and know what connection do you need for this kind of things (and 1Mb/256kb isn't godd enought).

Here is the explenation what speed do you actually have at home. If you have 1Mb connection it is not 1megabyte it is 1 MEGABIT or for those that doesn't know what bit that translate in 0.125 megabyte connection (a few byte up or down). And 10 Mb connection is really 1,25 megabyte. And I didn't take in account latency as this is very variable so I won't go in details.

Anyone that want to know what connection do they have in MB type in wolframalpha.com and you must write a small b.

If the gameplay and stuff work sort of like Borderlands, then I can understand, because then dedicated servers wouldn't make sense. But let's all relax a little and see how it goes with Modern Warfare before we start raging on.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Rage's multiplayer just some 4 player max co-op stuff? Dedicated servers aren't always necessary in such games, I'd still prefer them, but it's not as bigger deal as games that have 16-player matches in it. I think he's just riding the coattails of the recent IW controversy to get his game back into people's minds. All publicity is good publicity.

canadamus_prime:
This is not the way to stimulate PC game sales you morons!

Nobody cares about stimulating PC game sales except people who sell PC gaming equipment.

Game developers care about selling games. If they sell a copy of a game on PC, Xbox 360, or PS3 it's all the same to them - just one copy sold. The only reason why a platform is added to the list is because they think they can sell enough copies of the game on that platform to make a profit over the cost of the development for that platform.

Dedicated servers are a PC-only thing. PCs are the smallest market for mainstream games these days, and the effort probably isn't paying off anymore.

I'd be really interested to hear what he's got to say on the subject. Interviews with Carmack are always really interesting reads and the guy is staggeringly intelligent.

I wonder if this may have to do with the fact that games made with the Rage engine are essentially unmoddable because of the megatexturing technology?

Anyway, technical skill or no, Id hasn't made a good game since Quake 3 back in 1999.

Eh... "Suck it down you PC noobs/snobs/elitists/retards! Me am right, you r wrong! Oh my god, I am so genius!" That's what Carmack is saying in a nutshell.

I could care less what big shot developers think that is right. If you go against the wishes of your customers, it will be a decision you'll sooner or later come to pay dearly. Remnant of the past? Where have I heard this before? Oh wait, now I remember: Starcraft II lack of Lan. Arrrggghhh...

WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Another game I don't have to spend money on now! :(

Virgil:

canadamus_prime:
This is not the way to stimulate PC game sales you morons!

Nobody cares about stimulating PC game sales except people who sell PC gaming equipment.

Game developers care about selling games. If they sell a copy of a game on PC, Xbox 360, or PS3 it's all the same to them - just one copy sold. The only reason why a platform is added to the list is because they think they can sell enough copies of the game on that platform to make a profit over the cost of the development for that platform.

Dedicated servers are a PC-only thing. PCs are the smallest market for mainstream games these days, and the effort probably isn't paying off anymore.

That's why about four PS3 exclusive gams use dedicated servers. That's why Socom back on the PS2 used dedicated servers. That is why the few MMO' on consoles use dedicated servers... Ironically on the PC the game devs rarely pay for server upkeep at all. It is the players themselves that pay an ISP of some sort for the server all the dev has to do is release the server program to the public.

Hmm. This is disappointing even though I'm not a PC gamer.
I wouldn't want Carmack to lose any fan or sales because of this. Hopefully he will use dedicated servers, but I really want to read/hear exactly why John Carmack is doing this in an interview.

His interviews are great.

Simalacrum:
As a console only player, I don't get what all the fuss is about. Whats so special about the dedicated servers anyway? what do they do differently to console online? why are companies dropping it in favour of other methods, and how are those other methods meant to be better?

So many questions!

A dedicated server hosts the game with no players on, that means it can be set up for whatever game modes and left running.

Basically what it means as a gamer is that you get a list of servers which are there all the time, it tells you the game mode, number of players on, number of spaces available, map etc.

My experience of console gaming is that you click on multiplayer, it puts you in a random game with random people, random maps etc etc etc.

With dedicated servers you choose everything, you get to know the servers which are good/which people you like go on etc.

Far superior to random match making.

Yep. Looks like it's gonna be another game of "Follow the leader" when it comes to servers. I can imagine a slew of games throwing out dedicated servers for this.

It seems like now would be a good time to announce a retirement from the purchase of new PC games, effective after the purchase of Dragon Age: Origins. Seeing as I have no intentions of purchasing another separate machine for the purposes of playing games, it could end up being a retirement from purchasing new games almost completely, so it's the games industry's loss.

Can't they wait to see if it works with MW2 first and then decide to use it?

CantFaketheFunk:

uppitycracker:
The beginning of the end.... IW really is setting a new standard, that is essentially screwing over the same people that made them what they are today. Good job, IW, alienating us PC gamers and standardizing the console experience on PC.

I don't think you can blame IW for this. This is the sort of decision you don't make in the span of a month, and from what Carmack said it sounded like they'd been planning on it for a while. This was probably the direction Carmack & Co. decided on themselves. As much as people like to pin the blame on IW (and by extension Activision, since it is obviously The Great Satan and behind everything evil ever), their only sin in this case was probably announcing it first.

First of all, we can't blame activision for this. They leave a lot of creative control in the hands of the developers, and in this case, it was a decision made by IW. Activision is just backing them up on this. Second, regardless of whether Carmack had been planning this or not, the reason why it's such a big deal is the size of MW2. It's such a huge game, with such a huge audience, that it makes a much bigger impact than what Carmack might have going on, regardless of what he may have done for the PC community in the past. And he may have been toying with the idea already, but I bet it was still an undecided decision until IW announced this.

Abedeus:
What did Carmack do that was really, and I mean REALLY good in the past 7 years or so? And I mean, really, worthy of mentioning.

Wolfenstein from 2009 was at best a decent game. Quake Wars was good, but I doubt he had much to do with it.

played a FPS recently? you did? thank Carmack, he paved the way for modern day FPS's. Every time you play any FPS, Carmack and id helped clear the way for it, in essence, he is the Odin of PC FPS's.

So if he says they are planning on dropping Dedicated Servers, there is a good reason for it.

I hope this doesn't become the new norm... I pray to [insert deity(s) here] that it doesn't.

If Valve releases Team Fortress 3 or Counter-Strike 2 with no dedicated servers, then we will know it is the end.

CantFaketheFunk:
John Carmack is one of the people who made PC gaming what it is today. Few people know the platform better, I'd wager.

So it's really interesting to see him saying this.

Games are not like Quantum Physics. You can't have huge success, and then years later, when the industry has changed completely, and still be considered an expert just because you were years ago.

If there is no lag when i boot the game up and join a match, than i will have no problems. However if it takes me more than 1 minute to join a match, I will be thoroughly pissed off.

The whole console peer to peer pisses me off when you trying to find some1 to play with on a game mode/map that isnt as popular I just cant stand the wait. That is the one of the reason i love Dedicated servers AND listings. You find the one with a low ping many player and enter! quick and painless, no BS "Searching for players" or "Waiting for players to load." I bought the game to play it not wait in a waiting room <.<

Malygris:

Pingieking:
I'm actually relatively ok with the lack of a server. AS LONG AS: they come up with a solution that offers the same features that servers did, especially the kicking ability and the low ping rates.

So you're okay with the removal of dedicated server support, as long as all the functionality of dedicated server support remains?

I suppose I can't disagree with that, but it's a bit of a reinvention of the wheel, is it not?

It's more of the idea that a wheel made of rubber, plastic, and metal is better than a wheel made of wood. They would do the same basic stuff, just one would be able to perform better in most cases, and be more accessable.

I personally don't find anything wrong with the dedicated servers. However, I have heard complaints that they're too complicated (I strongly disagree). So if Id Software can come up with a system that offers all the features of dedicated server system, and make it more accessable (or whatever new stuff they managed to stick in it), then I'm all for it.

Powerman88:
John Carmak hasn't REALLY been relevant since the early 90's. He really reminds me of the kid from Grandma's Boy. What was the famous quote from him? Something to the effect of "Plot in videogames is like plot in porn; its expected but not important."

Especially not multiplayerwise. Rage looks pretty run for singleplayer, but is anyone really holding their breath to try it's multiplayer?

Kalezian:

Abedeus:
What did Carmack do that was really, and I mean REALLY good in the past 7 years or so? And I mean, really, worthy of mentioning.

Wolfenstein from 2009 was at best a decent game. Quake Wars was good, but I doubt he had much to do with it.

played a FPS recently? you did? thank Carmack, he paved the way for modern day FPS's. Every time you play any FPS, Carmack and id helped clear the way for it, in essence, he is the Odin of PC FPS's.

As was John Romero and well Daikatana?

PC Gaming now: "I say, did you see the cartoon in the New Yorker? It was quite good."
PC Gaming eventually: "dooodz, i lulz so hard @ CAD !!1!111!"

Excuse me, I'm going to take a shower to cleanse my fingers of the filth I put in for the "PC Gaming eventually" comment. Pip pip, cheerio.

Kalezian:

Abedeus:
What did Carmack do that was really, and I mean REALLY good in the past 7 years or so? And I mean, really, worthy of mentioning.

Wolfenstein from 2009 was at best a decent game. Quake Wars was good, but I doubt he had much to do with it.

played a FPS recently? you did? thank Carmack, he paved the way for modern day FPS's. Every time you play any FPS, Carmack and id helped clear the way for it, in essence, he is the Odin of PC FPS's.

So if he says they are planning on dropping Dedicated Servers, there is a good reason for it.

Stop living in the past.

The Wright dude also did some things good, and look at his latest game. Let down, huh? Times changed, his games were good for the time, but if someone just sits on his ass and takes the credit for something he did over 10 years ago, then excuse me if I don't consider him an authority figure. Also, read this:

Steelfists:

CantFaketheFunk:
John Carmack is one of the people who made PC gaming what it is today. Few people know the platform better, I'd wager.

So it's really interesting to see him saying this.

Games are not like Quantum Physics. You can't have huge success, and then years later, when the industry has changed completely, and still be considered an expert just because you were years ago.

j0z:
I hope this doesn't become the new norm... I pray to [insert deity(s) here] that it doesn't.

If Valve releases Team Fortress 3 or Counter-Strike 2 with no dedicated servers, then we will know it is the end.

Agreed. Once Valve caves, it might be high time to buy a console. I sure will miss mouse aiming though.

Frank_Sinatra_:

CantFaketheFunk:
John Carmack is one of the people who made PC gaming what it is today. Few people know the platform better, I'd wager.

So it's really interesting to see him saying this.

Could it be a sign to PC gamers to accept change for the good and bad?

Em I'm sorry what is the good with this change dedicated servers are far far superior to P2P.

OT: I think this is a shit move and I hope this trend is stopped quickly as dedicated servers are much better than P2P.

I want to see the outrage over the latency issues that will arise when this form of online play is implemented on the PC.

But really as Shamus Young expressed about Online activation applies to the whole debate about dedicated servers. Just remember that many years down the line when the company decides to take the servers down, your game will officially NOT have a multiplayer element.

plus i dont see how the development team cant make money off of Dedicated servers. i mean by doing this they are gonna have to fork the bill for servers to run the match making service. And if you want to get rid of the lag your gonna have to host servers too. So why cant they just rent these servers out to ppl willing to pay for it? I mean holy crap the Dedicated server market is huge.

The Fail that undoes 15 years of Win.

I won't get angry, but if Carmack starts whining like a bitch that a cracked version of Rage that supports dedicated servers is being widely used... well then I hope he gets a compound fracture in his arm so he can never use mouse aim again.

Malygris:

Pingieking:
I'm actually relatively ok with the lack of a server. AS LONG AS: they come up with a solution that offers the same features that servers did, especially the kicking ability and the low ping rates.

So you're okay with the removal of dedicated server support, as long as all the functionality of dedicated server support remains?

I suppose I can't disagree with that, but it's a bit of a reinvention of the wheel, is it not?

No, it's more like saying that square wheels don't bloody well work, we should have kept them round.

i.e. dedicated server = round wheel,

It's old, it works, only an IDIOT would release a car with square wheels, just like a PC game without dedicated server support.

It's not about the ping or the feasibility of p2p hosting, they'll figure it out, eventually. The lack of dedicated servers affects gamers in another major aspect, the servers were *a place* to go. You ran into the same bunch of people and ended up befriending them, eventually forming a community.

There was no use for social network styled interfaces, you went someplace and had some fun, people who rented those servers tried to shape them into their ideal gaming environment, some ended up being known as friendly places, others for being on the hardcore end of the scale.

I fail to see the point of being randomly matched to some bloke i'll never see again. If you're not part of a community already, how exactly will you be able to start or join one? They'll likely throw in some social network crap to compensate for the lack of interaction between the players they caused in the first place by ditching dedicated servers.

It sounds quite like closing down all the pubs, while still selling beer to people and telling them "you and the last ten lads who got themselves a beer will go to this random fellow's place, and he'll throw you out when your done with your pint".

tl;dr : Retarded move, let's hope he changes his mind.

Oh no...another game without D.Servers...

Guess the gamers will boycott Rage as well...

KSarty:

oppp7:
I would like to thank game pirates for this. Everyone here who has ever pirated a game, this is because of you.

Pull your head out of your ass, piracy has nothing to do with dedicated servers. Eliminating dedicated servers does absolutely nothing to prevent piracy.

I play a very small handful of mods, and usually they are SP, but I can certainly understand why the mod community in particular would be upset about this. I always enjoyed creating my own server while playing some of the classics. Anybody ever play the dueling servers in Jedi Academy?

Doesn't the fact that people have to play the game on the companies servers make it easier to make sure the users are playing an official copy? It seems like that would be the only logical reason for getting rid of dedicated servers.

CantFaketheFunk:
John Carmack is one of the people who made PC gaming what it is today. Few people know the platform better, I'd wager.

So it's really interesting to see him saying this.

Maybe, but he is not as near as relevant as he was back then

This absolutely pisses me off! I guess it could be worse, I figure if anyone can program a good peer-to-peer gaming network structure it'd be Carmack, but sometimes there's things that are just so good, that have a culture about them already, that you don't want to see them go. Why do we have to forsake dedicated server gaming just to see where matchmaking takes us? Why not offer both? Why? WHY DAMMIT WHY??? I SPENT TOO MANY YEARS PLAYING COUNTER-STRIKE AND QUAKE III TO RELEARN NOW!!

Steelfists:

CantFaketheFunk:
John Carmack is one of the people who made PC gaming what it is today. Few people know the platform better, I'd wager.

So it's really interesting to see him saying this.

Games are not like Quantum Physics. You can't have huge success, and then years later, when the industry has changed completely, and still be considered an expert just because you were years ago.

AndresCL:

CantFaketheFunk:
John Carmack is one of the people who made PC gaming what it is today. Few people know the platform better, I'd wager.

So it's really interesting to see him saying this.

Maybe, but he is not as near as relevant as he was back then

Because frankly, PC games aren't as relevant as they were back then.

The man is staggeringly smart, and I'd wager good money that he's still in the highest echelons of people who understand the PC as a gaming platform and what it can do.

It seems Infinity Ward's attempt at a big change is starting to snowball, and id is a lot of snow gathered, and there might be a few others jumping on.

However at this point, it can only be an experiment. We'll probably go through a phase where people either grit their teeth without servers, or not touch the multiplayer.