IWnet for COD MW2. Question for you.

Oizu · 23 Nov 2009 at 21:38

and of course the list of game modes feels so, so, so restricting, i like playing non hardcore without heartbeat sensors e.t.c. but thats just not possible any more, really dont like it

ScarySquirrel · 23 Nov 2009 at 22:06

No. But I can live with it for now.

interspaced · 23 Nov 2009 at 22:44

passable. However it's way lesser experience than cod4 with dedicated servers.

Skeeter · 23 Nov 2009 at 22:46

No.

/thread.

HAz · 23 Nov 2009 at 23:03

what do u guys do if u got some racist guys being a ****. Or a blatant hacker?

interspaced · 23 Nov 2009 at 23:05

HAz said:
what do u guys do if u got some racist guys being a ****. Or a blatant hacker?

sadly leave and try another game. Another failing of the stupid iwnet.

paradigm · 23 Nov 2009 at 23:11

It's crap, and the only reason I'm not running the hack is due to the risk of being VAC banned.

drew64 · 23 Nov 2009 at 23:31

HAz said:
what do u guys do if u got some racist guys being a ****. Or a blatant hacker?

racist: mute
blatent hacker: jump into a new lobby after the game.

pretty much the same as CoD4 unless you were in a really tight nit community

Redgie · 23 Nov 2009 at 23:40

My least favourite part has to be:

1. You run round a corner
2. You go into a building
3. You die
4. The replay shows you being shot before you went round the corner
???

Other than the host migration, occasional lag spikes and lag compensation, I figure they could have done a much worse job.

linktoinsanity · 24 Nov 2009 at 01:36

Kenai said:
I think elements of it are good, it's certainly easier to use, regardless of how difficult a server list isn't.

However I think they could have made a matchmaking system and propped it up with a dedicated back end, somewhat like L4D does.

Also, the inability to select maps is clearly starting to grate with some people, so little things like that really need sorting, it's all very well it finding a load of games to join, it would be better if you could be more specific about what you wanted it to find.

This sums up my view pretty much perfectly.

Phill4321 · 24 Nov 2009 at 06:48

I'm not impressed with this iwnet. Not being able to select a map and have 32 or 64 player maps is appalling. My ping is also laggy as well.

xGaffner · 24 Nov 2009 at 06:58

Kenai said:
I think elements of it are good, it's certainly easier to use, regardless of how difficult a server list isn't.

However I think they could have made a matchmaking system and propped it up with a dedicated back end, somewhat like L4D does.

Also, the inability to select maps is clearly starting to grate with some people, so little things like that really need sorting, it's all very well it finding a load of games to join, it would be better if you could be more specific about what you wanted it to find.

this

richiesimms · 24 Nov 2009 at 07:50

The problem for me is lag.Ive noticed the more i play in hardcore gametype the more it matters.Matchmaking is poor at best.
Never had any issues with dedis.Shame,really love the game.

Tripnologist · 24 Nov 2009 at 09:24

drew64 said:
pretty much the same as CoD4 unless you were in a really tight nit community

So you're saying that only 'really tight nit' communities would kick hackers and racists? Don't know what kind of servers you played on but I've never been on a server with an admin present who didn't kick for those things. Tight community or not.

Bones · 24 Nov 2009 at 11:14

great game ruined because of all the above said reasons.

Steveo1982 · 24 Nov 2009 at 11:19

Does anyone else hate the fact that when the host has a poor connection and is dropped it takes ages for the game to go to a new host and by the time your back in the game youve missed the person you were shooting at!

Tk7 · 24 Nov 2009 at 11:22

I don't feel IWnet has ruined the game, but I cannot see any way in which it is better then dedicated servers.

I mainly feared how the game would play out 6v6 (I mainly play hardcore TDM), but the maps aren't too big, and the action is pretty steady for me.

I might have been lucky, but i've only had to quit out of a couple of laggy games. Generally lag has not been an issue for me (I have 20mb cable so i'd hope not).

I can't see how the multiplayer will have the longevity of CoD4/5, but maybe that's where paid for DLC will come in. I preferred CoD5 over 4, and couldn't put multiplayer down when I got that. I barely touched single player for a month.

Anyhow, I do hope Infinity Ward see sense here, but I won't be holding my breath. Multiplayer is still good fun, but it could have been superb with dedicated servers.

QuagmireUK · 24 Nov 2009 at 19:47

I signed the petition etc but I always said I would give it a chance. 3 weeks later the game is getting worse by the day. When the system works it isnt even close to being as bad as i though it was going to be, however, it very rarely works the way it should do, I have been in a sevrer and some bloke opened his mouth and I was astonished that he spoke with an american accent. He had 3 bars, I had 4 and from experience I know that a US player (even east coast) has 175+ ping <-- 3 Bars?!?!?

This system may work in 3-5 years when the average connection is faster and more stable.

Tripnologist · 24 Nov 2009 at 20:24

QuagmireUK said:
I have been in a sevrer and some bloke opened his mouth and I was astonished that he spoke with an american accent. He had 3 bars, I had 4 and from experience I know that a US player (even east coast) has 175+ ping <-- 3 Bars?!?!?

Doesn't mean too much tbh. I'm Canadian and when I first joined my clan, they were wondering why I had the best ping to our London based server out of everyone in the clan. The answer is quite simple, I don't like in Canada.