I'm not a "hardcore" gamer anymore, haven't been for a fair few years now ... neither are plenty of people who are posting.
Yet we all want dedicated servers as we all want to play as part of some community with other regular community people.
*** Official Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 Thread***
- Thread starter 4p
- Start date
I'm not a "hardcore" gamer anymore, haven't been for a fair few years now ... neither are plenty of people who are posting.
Yet we all want dedicated servers as we all want to play as part of some community with other regular community people.
Then we agree to disagree on this matter, the "casual" gamer i would have thought would be the console owner, i wouldn't class the people out there building new PC's or buying new hardware (GFX cards for instance) periodically to keep with new games releases "casual" at all.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 16,275
- Location
- Neptune
Ok. Fair point. However, just look at the number who have signed that petition in comparison to the likely sales the game will have; millions.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 16,275
- Location
- Neptune
PCs built (or purchased) in the last couple of years will run CoD 4 and most likely MW2 well enough for the majority.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 16,275
- Location
- Neptune
How many people is that?
which you claim only affects the hardcore community and the competitive players, ie the one group you have absolutely guaranteed sales from because they cannot play with illegal copies.
Seems an odd target for anti piracy claims.
especially as without dedicated servers they only have to crack the game to let them play through hamachi rather than crack the game then crack the dedicated server files, and the actually find someone to pay for and host those cracked server files.
Very odd target indeed, much more likely it's to remove nodding and make them capable of charging DLC
Because so far the DLC for Call of duty 4 on the 360 has sold over million copies at $10 each. (and please note this was in April 2008 the figure is probably much higher now)
and call of duty World at war DLC sold over 1 million copies agin for $10 a pop.
You honestly think this was for the small sum they would gain from reduced piracy or the massive tens of millions of dollars of extra revenue from DLC sales?
sources for ales figures. (figures also only xbox live not PSN figures)
http://www.primotechnology.com/2008/04/18/call-of-duty-4-map-pack-sets-dlc-sales-record/
http://www.xboxgaming.co.za/news/cod-waw-map-pack-1-dlc-sets-xbl-download-record/
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 16,275
- Location
- Neptune
Well, and I'm trying hard not to **** PC gamers off in here (it's not my intention but a couple seem to get riled very easily), that's peanuts in terms of the bigger picture.
Well, and I'm trying hard not to **** PC gamers off in here (it's not my intention but a couple seem to get riled very easily), that's peanuts in terms of the bigger picture.
Of course it's peanuts, but do you expect people to say nothing and let them get away with it and bring out yet another poor port with bugs and no dedicated server?
I think not so every person counts.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 16,275
- Location
- Neptune
The group you mention (hardcore and competitive players) are the minority in the grand scheme of things. That's the point I'm making - they (IW) can 'afford' to lose the support of those types of gamers if they can create a system that makes it all far more accessible to the casual gamer (the majority) who then can be 'introduced' so easily to the paid DLC etc (as your numbers below explain; the 360 doesn't have dedicated servers and those that use Live do so knowing what experience they will have and how easy it is to join/start game, find their friends, download new content quickly and easily and pay for it without much trouble etc etc). Do you see my point?
But that's what I'm trying to get at - the sum isn't small. The estimate I gave was a low number (10%) to keep things relatively digestible. If the numbers weren't important they wouldn't bother with all these security systems and now IW.net (or whatever it's called).
ok, another way of looking at it....
there are currently 16549 CoD4 servers listed in my server list, now most clans will have a minimum of 8 players going up to 50+ for some of the bigger clans, thats not taking into account any public players, thats a lot of players right there.
WaW on the other hand, has 3221 servers in my server list, this shocked me tbh, i thought it would be much higher, but my original point, Activision do not want all those people to be playing an "old" game, they want us to buy the new one, and if they can control the online side of the game, they can "turn off" the old one when the new one comes along. And also control all DLC, i bet any map packs for MW2 are not going to be free.
there are currently 16549 CoD4 servers listed in my server list, now most clans will have a minimum of 8 players going up to 50+ for some of the bigger clans, thats not taking into account any public players, thats a lot of players right there.
WaW on the other hand, has 3221 servers in my server list, this shocked me tbh, i thought it would be much higher, but my original point, Activision do not want all those people to be playing an "old" game, they want us to buy the new one, and if they can control the online side of the game, they can "turn off" the old one when the new one comes along. And also control all DLC, i bet any map packs for MW2 are not going to be free.
yes, but that point is flawed. you are assuming everyone going to buy the game knows of these changes and on top of that knows of the petition. Not forgetting there could also be many more petitions about we are not yet aware of....
well this is the thing like most clans they will have members like my own have about three hundred members for site alone and then theres other members who just play on servers . so when your talking hundreds of members who play on your servers and you have thousands of clans it starts to mount up very very quickly!
Even on consoles, dedicated servers are better.
-Better uptime
-Lower latencies
-Better performance (32 player games use megabits of bandwidth that some people don't have)
-Customization
-Communities
Ideally they'd allow dedi servers for both PC and console. Microsoft is encouraging game makers to allow dedicated servers for consoles and PCs through Games for Windows. Valve likes matchmaking (L4D) but uses a hybrid with dedi servers.
-Better uptime
-Lower latencies
-Better performance (32 player games use megabits of bandwidth that some people don't have)
-Customization
-Communities
Ideally they'd allow dedi servers for both PC and console. Microsoft is encouraging game makers to allow dedicated servers for consoles and PCs through Games for Windows. Valve likes matchmaking (L4D) but uses a hybrid with dedi servers.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 4,185
I have no reason to buy this now. I only purchased the previous ones for a very rare bit of MP with friends, the SP was good for both but lasted no time at all.
Well, and I'm trying hard not to **** PC gamers off in here (it's not my intention but a couple seem to get riled very easily), that's peanuts in terms of the bigger picture.
Thats because you've walzed into this thread making some big claims without having having a proper understanding of what you're talking about. Its not really *that* surprising mate...