Digg.com - Modern Warfare 2 boycott.

Streeteh · 27 Oct 2009 at 08:58

I have to agree with the viewpoint that, while the removal of dedicated servers and modding tools is bad, the attitude many have that 'we're now justified in pirating it' is just utter dross. If you don't like it then don't buy it, fine, it's what i'll be doing, but spouting this drivel about now being allowed to break the law because it doesn't have the feature set you wanted is just childish.

I don't even care if people DO pirate it, what annoys me is those trying to hold the moral high ground when doing so. You're breaking the law, it's wrong, the fact it doesn't have dedicated servers doesn't make it right.

stifler · 27 Oct 2009 at 09:02

my local game shop rents out used pc games for £2 a night, i'll just wait till they have one in

and with abit of lucky i wont need the disk to play online like the other versions.

Davepen · 27 Oct 2009 at 09:04

Troll much cheets?

People are not calling the game crap.

They are calling the fact that Inifinity Ward have seemingly crippled a otherwise awesome PC mutiplayer game in order to charge for map packs.

PC mutiplayer is fine with dedicated servers.

Peer 2 peer gaming works fine with consoles, where no other options are available, but downgrading PC to peer 2 peer will increase lag and decrease the amount of players on a server. This will also force PC users to pay for otherwise free map updates.

Final8y · 27 Oct 2009 at 09:24

Streeteh said:
I have to agree with the viewpoint that, while the removal of dedicated servers and modding tools is bad, the attitude many have that 'we're now justified in pirating it' is just utter dross. If you don't like it then don't buy it, fine, it's what i'll be doing, but spouting this drivel about now being allowed to break the law because it doesn't have the feature set you wanted is just childish.

I don't even care if people DO pirate it, what annoys me is those trying to hold the moral high ground when doing so. You're breaking the law, it's wrong, the fact it doesn't have dedicated servers doesn't make it right.

I agree & will be holding out for reviews of the SP as the MP has a big ? mark over it. 16v16 maybe just enough for me..maybe.

Final8y · 27 Oct 2009 at 09:26

Davepen said:
Troll much cheets?

People are not calling the game crap.

They are calling the fact that Inifinity Ward have seemingly crippled a otherwise awesome PC mutiplayer game in order to charge for map packs.

PC mutiplayer is fine with dedicated servers.

Peer 2 peer gaming works fine with consoles, where no other options are available, but downgrading PC to peer 2 peer will increase lag and decrease the amount of players on a server. This will also force PC users to pay for otherwise free map updates.

Just hope that this does not become a trend in general.

McGray · 27 Oct 2009 at 09:26

There is no 16v16.

8v8 max or more than likely due too lag 6v6.

linktoinsanity · 27 Oct 2009 at 09:42

Durzel said:
They're not screwing you though. Just because something doesn't have a feature you personally like doesn't entitle you to rip them off. Do you sit through films you have no interest in and know you'll hate before even seeing them and criticise the fact that they exist?

Not having dedicated servers sucks, but arguing that because it doesn't have it you're entitled to pirate it, or that it's somehow "not as bad" is ridiculous.

It does not give anyone the right to pirate it. End of. It's pathetic how IW have handled the news and the attitude towards what could be customers that made me cancel in the end. No dedicated servers made me angry but I kept my preorder, however the constant statements basicly calling PC gamers pathetic nerds mainly backed by console fanboys who have no idea whatsoever what a dedicated server is made me decide I just didn't want to be part of the community. IW can go **** themselves for all I care.

I'm just not gonna get it now until there is an offer or something and it goes into the bargain bin for a tenner or less (even then I will think twice)...

Streeteh · 27 Oct 2009 at 09:43

Davepen said:
Peer 2 peer gaming works fine with consoles.

It doesn't imo, to show this Sony have resorted to hosting their own dedicated servers for nearly all of their first party multiplayer games. Peer 2 peer on consoles brings low player counts, host advantage and lag. For example games like warhawk (32 player) Resistance 2 (64 players) and MAG (up to 256 players on a single server!) would not be possible if it weren't for Sony hosting these servers. On the other side of the coin there's games like Gears of War 2 which takes forever to matchmake and always results in the host having the advantage or little big planet where it's near impossible to find a lag free 4-player game.

Peer 2 peer is only bad.

Muzy · 27 Oct 2009 at 09:58

I am getting confused here: Someone explain to me why L4D match making can find servers ? those server are dedi ?

probably Link To Insanity can explain ? :confused:

Streeteh · 27 Oct 2009 at 10:01

iirc, left 4 dead has dedicated servers, yes. When players start a match they 'lease' bandwidth from these dedicated servers, or at least that's how i was led to believe it worked.

hardtarget · 27 Oct 2009 at 10:24

Streeteh said:
iirc, left 4 dead has dedicated servers, yes. When players start a match they 'lease' bandwidth from these dedicated servers, or at least that's how i was led to believe it worked.

Correct from what I've read.

Strife212 · 27 Oct 2009 at 11:51

So what do you guys think of 3rd person mode?

matt_fsr · 27 Oct 2009 at 12:01

Strife212 said:
So what do you guys think of 3rd person mode?

Ban TBH

Personally I dont like 3rd person, but I treat that as a personal preference.

COD MW:3 to be 3rd person, multiplayer played by sending telegrams? Faxes? Carrier pigeon?

Strife212 · 27 Oct 2009 at 12:04

No, really, this has 3rd person mode, it just got confirmed

hardtarget · 27 Oct 2009 at 12:06

matt_fsr said:
COD MW:3 to be 3rd person, multiplayer played by sending telegrams? Faxes? Carrier pigeon?

Don't laugh this just might be true

trickycurve · 27 Oct 2009 at 12:18

Third-person as an option isn't anything to moan about. You can even go third-person in the Source games (well, CS:S is the only one I've tried) if you have cheats on and use a couple of commands to align the camera correctly.

McGray · 27 Oct 2009 at 12:23

3rd person is a gametype in there, you won't be able to switch between the two.

Durzel · 27 Oct 2009 at 12:27

Streeteh said:
iirc, left 4 dead has dedicated servers, yes. When players start a match they 'lease' bandwidth from these dedicated servers, or at least that's how i was led to believe it worked.

Yeah that's right. L4D has always used dedicated servers behind the scenes. You could bring up the server browser to connect directly to a server before they added the menu option for it (or maybe they didn't add the menu option and I just hacked it in like loads of other people - can't remember).

The only exception to this was when the host was unable to find a server to join, he/she then had the option to host locally (P2P). You knew when this had happened because everyone except the host had a crappy connection.

Don't get me wrong I'm disappointed about MW2 not having dedicated servers and I think it's a step back for PC users. That being said, we're not talking about life-saving medicine here - it's a piece of entertainment. IW can make the game how they want for who they want and our choice is to buy it or not, like with everything else in life.

linktoinsanity · 27 Oct 2009 at 12:38

Durzel said:
Yeah that's right. L4D has always used dedicated servers behind the scenes. You could bring up the server browser to connect directly to a server before they added the menu option for it (or maybe they didn't add the menu option and I just hacked it in like loads of other people - can't remember).

The only exception to this was when the host was unable to find a server to join, he/she then had the option to host locally (P2P). You knew when this had happened because everyone except the host had a crappy connection.

Don't get me wrong I'm disappointed about MW2 not having dedicated servers and I think it's a step back for PC users. That being said, we're not talking about life-saving medicine here - it's a piece of entertainment. IW can make the game how they want for who they want and our choice is to buy it or not, like with everything else in life.

Totally correct. Yes, Left 4 Dead has the best of both worlds and is the example I think of how matchmaking should evolve, not by using P2P like some odd game that I can't remember the name of is doing!

Streeteh · 27 Oct 2009 at 13:06

LinktoInsanity said:
Totally correct. Yes, Left 4 Dead has the best of both worlds and is the example I think of how matchmaking should evolve, not by using P2P like some odd game that I can't remember the name of is doing!

Killzone 2 on the PS3 also used the 'L4D method' but took it a step further with 32 man servers. It was great, you could start your 'own' private server with friends and a dedicated server would magically appear for them all with whatever password and settings you set. Imagine old-school barrysworld style stuff but within the game and worked instantly. Worked a treat and imo is the way things should be going, as you say this is a step back.

[EDIT] Bit of a tangent but i went to do a little more reading up about Sony dedicated servers for the PS3, assuming there was some form of software they ran on standard servers to host, turns out i was wrong:

Yes those are all PS3s, guess they make a bit of a saving on hardware costs! Jesus, if even some console games are now getting dedicated servers, why did IW even think it was a good idea to remove it from the PC scene? It's clearly the way the consumer wants it to go.