thx to www.worthplaying.com for the news...

Big mistake IMO:

Saw that over at TotalCOD site.

Not sure I like the sound of this. Do you understand what this means, Magnum?

I am not very PC savy, and don't understand how you and I would play a game together, on-line without a dedicated server? How do we connect?

Thanks................................Kingkat

With no dedicated server support, you would connect peer to peer (to another player's PC) or through Activision's game servers. It eliminates the persistent 24/7 game servers run by the community.

It means some buttheads are making business decisions.
there, translated from sailoreeze to forum acceptable language

Not surprised, they're doing everything they can in a hope to reduce chances of piracy etc, I'm just waiting to hear the announcement that MW2 will not have LAN support.

Great. Codemasters shaft the PC gamers and now Activision follow suit. 10 years from now will there even be new games on the PC?

Dedicated server software requires additional coding, expense and effort. You know, like the printed manuals we used-to-get with sims that are PDF now. Seriously, I'm thinking dedicated server software is an endangered species in all but premium content. Wonder how long it will be before we see a Multiplayer Ultimate version that includes dedicated server software, and costs $15 more than the standard version.

I would kinda expect the opposite, you know, that ripping out dedicated server support would be a boost for piracy. I think a lot of multiplayer games phone home to a master server database to fetch server info and populate a multiplayer game list, during which time a CD key check can be done. Yeah, it can be bypassed, but doing so means you usually can't play on legitimate servers, and I don't think cracked servers are ever very popular.

So, without dedicated server support, that means I can't buy a game and get a server set up for my buddies to enjoy privately. For me, that in turn means I'm less likely to try the multiplayer at all; I want a central meeting area that I can control and configure as I want. So, hypothetically, why pay for a game that I'll primarily use for singleplayer, when that area of the game is the easiest and most frequently cracked? In other words, when you buy a game, what you are getting over a cracked version is the multiplayer. Without the multiplayer there is no practical difference between a cracked copy and a legitimate copy.

Indeed it will IMO be a boost for piracy, just like ripping LAN support out of Starcraft 2, a game which is widely played at LANs etc, will increase the number of people who pirate it.

But apparently the corporate morons at the top believe that by removing features in the originals, MORE people will buy the sequels apparently.

Thanks for the info............its what I was afraid of.

Kinda makes a decision for me about what games I am likely NOT to buy in the near future!!!!!


I may join the crowds and cancel my pre-order too!

Because of this particular decision Activision won't be making any money from me this time around. Too bad since I was really looking forward to this one.

I am seriously thinking of not buying also. COD games are pretty good single player experiences but I never play them again due to them being on rails and the MP was what gave it longevity, ripping out the dedicated servers will kill it...

Well I don't like it... but to ME, and JMO, for my own gaming purposes... I really look forward to the SP story and the 2 player co-op... so I will definitely still be getting it... The CoD series, especially the Modern Warfare series, was never the force on force, multiplayer experience I was/am looking for. Sure I had fun playing force on force MP for a while... 4 to 6 months, but then it gets old.

In the force on force gameplay, I still prefer games like the original GR, ArmA2, and now (hopefully, after a patch) OFP DR... So I'm still in, even thou I don't like their decision.

That kills it for me. The only way I'd play ANYTHING on MP is if I'm in a dedicated server with the rest of the people from HERE.

Otherwise, it's an online crapfest.

pfunk

Cancelling my order, this is complete BS. I've been waiting all year for 11/10 and now a month before the big blow is thrown. THANKS Activision!!

IW respond:

http://gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2009/10/20/modern-warfare-2-dedicated-server-response.aspx

they don't give a toss about PC gamers when it's us who supported COD all those years ago when consolers were playing Sonic....pisses me off.

Get used to it.

It'll prepare you for OnLive.....

I'll stop playing games before I get a console...

Traditional means and delivery of content will always be changing.

http://metue.com/10-16-2009/video-games-trends-future-looks-predictions/

Oh please, OnLive will doubtfully manage to deliver what it claims, due to natural limitations of the modern-day internet networks.

How exactly do you reckon OnLive will be able to in real-time stream 720p footage with such high speeds that response times won't suffer greatly?

Honestly, OnLive's not the future of gaming IMO, it's an experiment and nothing more, the majority will still want to own the actual consoles themselves IMO.

Here's some good links on hte subject of OnLive's unrealistic claims.

http://doublebuffered.com/2009/04/05/why-onlive-wont-work/

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/gdc-why-onlive-cant-possibly-work-article

http://www.pcworld.com/article/161930-2/gdc_09_6_reasons_onlive_could_be_a_bust.html

Whilst IMO the future of gaming definitely rests within downloadable content and microtransaction-systems, it does not rest within OnLive. IMO OnLive will only appeal to the poorer levels of gamers who can't afford to get their own systems and their own games and thus have to 'rent' them from said company.

Basically OnLive will at its best work as a form of streamed-renting system where you can rent a console, and games, IMO it will not at all be able to replace the substantial commercial side with people actually buying the platforms and games.

Oh please, don't fabricate things that were never said.

So again I'll state, get used to it.

This thread is about what, calling Activision idiots for their decisions?

In fact I don't see anything in what Activision has planned that threatens my ability to enjoy Modern Warfare 2 just fine. So if I can find a Modern Warfare 2 game session, and join in, and have fun with it just fine, tell me where I have to buy into this "Activision, what idiots" thinking!

Tell me how I or many millions of other gamers who will buy and enjoy Modern Warfare 2 need get worked up about any of this.

Have you played OPF2 online? Without dedicated servers it's terrible and I can't find a game below a ping of 600. The SP COD games are good for one play through (only lasting a few hours) and then the meat was in the MP, without dedicated servers it's unplayable.

It's not neccesarily about MW2 though why people are angry, it's about the u-turn against PC games. Codemasters did it with OFP2 and IW brought out special editions of MW2 for the consoles but nothing for the PC and then we find out they can't be bothered to add dedicated servers because console players don't want them. We are an after thought now and have to take the scraps from the consoles table.

As I said before I don't think we will have PC games in 10 years. Xbox and PS have massive marketing machines to push their barnds the PC has none. Game devs now know they can turn out a half arsed game and console players will lap it up if it has some flashing lights and big bangs and is in no way taxing, easy money.

I am not buying MW2 because of the attitude of IW but I know they won't care if millions don't buy it as it will just make it an easier option for them to say 'screw the PC', well 'screw IW' they won't get my money.

Where did I fabricate something, and what was it I fabricated?

Did you even check the links I provided? OnLive is nothing that's been proven to be a solid concept, it's still in a testing phase, it might very well crash and burn.



It's sad but that's the way it is, console's are where the money's at, exceptions being genres like Simulation, MMORPG and RTS.

What makes things worse is that piracy is far more prevalent on PC than on consoles, which further decreases the wish of the big publishers to invest a lot of time into the PC versions.

Sure, the XB360's been cracked for a while so you can pirate games on that, but the PS3's been out for over three years and it's still uncracked and you can't pirate on it.

I disagree with the part you say about half-assed games, that's not the problem, console gamers are no 'less' picky than your average PC gamer, to prove this I point to the fact that The Sims are the best-selling PC series of all time, THE SIMS for crying out loud. the problem is the ease of pirating on the PC coupled with more work than on the console versions. For the PC you have to optimize it for several different setups, even different OSes etc, then you have to choose a third-party copyprotection solution.

In the end, it's a bad spiral IMO, publishers feel no need to give PC gamers as much support since they're(generally) smaller than the console gamers, this in turn leads to PC gamers abandoning the publishers PC ports, which in turns lead to the publishers feeling even less need, and so it goes on.

And generally, it appears most companies have a very hard time striking a good balance, Valve has done a great job with free updates etc on the PC, but done very poorly with it on the 360/PS3 versions of their games.

I've played lousy sessions on dedicated servers, so isn't it always about the hardware and the connection. ???

I don't own a console either, just been constantly buying, upgrading, buying, and upgrading PCs now for over a dozen years, to basically play what, $50 games?

There is platform bias certainly, and now I'm personally getting tired of spending thousands of dollars on PC hardware that's disproportionate to what's needed for a similar experience console gamers are enjoying.

Never stated OnLive was the only future, but then again some of the very game companies who service this industry have invested hundred of millions of dollars in it, the latest amount reported at $500 million USD. That's half a billion dollars (I'll take that bet).

Quite the opposite to a previously stated opinion, if games go console-only in the future, or, become accessable on multi-platform hardware, like through gaming services such as OnLive, I'll be considering the move.

I'm almost there now.

Just another reason why I prefer MP gaming on XBox 360/Live.

I was planning to also buy the PC version of this (like I did with CoD4) but I'll pass.

Hard to believe that Treyarch has the upper hand over IW when it comes to how they handle MP. The MP aspect of CoD:WaW has it all over the MP aspect of CoD4 (at least on the 360).


Personally, I've all but abandoned gaming on my PC (despite just ordering a new PC). I do 90% of my gaming on my 360 and I don't really miss the PC at all. The constant upgrading/patching/hacking/cheating etc. grew very old and tired (not to mention expensive as a mo'f).

Quite frankly, anyone who doesn't understand the problem with not having dedicated servers obviously doesn't understand the networking behind it and the benefits it gives.

Whilst a lot of people will claim their own individual enjoyment will not diminish, there are probably more who say it will.....there are also a lot of people who will only realise how good dedicated servers are when they don't have it.....and then the penny will drop.

You know, they continue this kind of crap, and it will hurt the PC industry. I don't know how much of PC sales go to gamers, but I know it's a huge chunk of the market. They stop making PC games, I stop buying new computers. Me and a whole lot of other people. Not out of spite, I just won't have any reason to.
I wouldn't need this rig I've got unless I was going to game on it. And I wouldn't have bought that 200 dollar video card and I wouldn't have doubled the RAMM!
We spend a lot of money on gaming, and it's not just on games.

This is why I've migrated to the 360. I used to spend a fortune on PC hardware. Between $800-$1200 every year on major upgrades or a new system every 12-18 months. And then another $800 or so on software (games). And for what? Only to find out that the video card I bought 6 months ago is obsolete. Or the game I bought is a bug-ridden mess that needs 3 patches just to run? I don't think so.

I've had two 360's die on me, lucky both were under warranty, but even if they weren't it'd STILL be worth it to replace them compared to what I used to spend on my PC. Making the switch to the console is the best (and cheapest) gaming decision I've ever made. I could buy a new 360 every 6 months and it'd still be cheaper than what I used to spend on my PC every year.

People that say they'd rather stop gaming than play on a console, I just don't understand it. Hard for me to consider anyone a "gamer" if they only are interested in PC's. There are a LOT of good games out there that play on consoles and many excellent games are console exclusives.

I just ordered an entry-level PC out of necessity, my current one is 5+ years old. This next one will last me at least that long, maybe longer. The days of me spending a small fortune on a box to mostly do nothing but surf the web and have e-mail is over.

And the decision gets easier when game developers take away features like dedicated servers on games that are heavily MP dependent like the CoD series.

awesome...just another way to divide the PC/Console crowds

it seems more and more games that are developed on the console are starting to have less and less features for the PC. I don't think I'll ever buy another console port.

You would think they'd try to make console and PC multiplayer compatible so no matter what system you're running you can still play the same game together; but I have a feeling the console makers and hardware manufactures they use wouldn't like that all too much.

what a shame



oh IDK...better graphics, mods, customization, better controllers (at least IMO), flight sims, I can do more than one thing on a PC...I also like to tweak hardware and try to get the most performance out of it. I realize this isn't for everyone; but for the people that actually use PC's to their full potential I'll be damned if I'm going to down-grade to a console just so I can play a game that typically would look/play better if on a PC

I don't want to sit in fornt of my TV squinting to see what something is whilst trying to aim a gun with a thumbstick is not my idea of fun. You wouldn't sit down at the PC and play an infantryman and control him with a joystick but that is what playing with a console controller is like.

I had an Xbox 360 and sold it in 3 weeks, the games just couldn't hold my attention and I felt so insular and 'alone'. Play MP you may say? I am not going to pay for broadband in my house and then on top of that have to pay for Xbox Live to play online on a console when I can play the MP portion of my games on PC for free.

Somebody said they would not play another console port, well you may as well stop playing because they will all be console ports before they stop bothering altogether.

I will keep the games I have and play on my PC. I will not get a console ever again, my 10 year old son does not like consoles either and plays on the PC as he said as well that the games are not as good on consoles.

Consoles have killed PC games and I will go down on the bridge of the good ship PC Gamer if that what I have to do. Maybe we should change the site name to ConsoleHQ?.....

When I got my first console I HATED using the controller for anything other than sports titles. In fact, the only reason I bought the console was for sports games. FPS games take some getting used to with a controller (and it may be more than 3 weeks for some people) but eventually you DO get used to it. NO ONE on the planet was more dead set against using a gamepad for FPS games than I was. I mean, I was absolutely adamant about it. But, over time, I got used to it and now it's second nature.

I don't think I'll ever game on a PC like I used to back in the "good ol' days". Sure, I'd still rather have a mouse and keyboard but I really don't miss it.

Same but I'm still not sure about buying a new PC, I mean most if not all games come to either the PS3 or the 360 as well these days, and buying a new gaming PC for just like ten or so games that's coming out in 2010 just doesn't seem worth it.

If I won the lottery though, daaaamn dude, I'd buy myself one of those super-rigs from Alienware for 60 grand.*Dreams*

FlyRetired,

This action may not effect you and the console users, but it does effect millions of PC players very negatively. Players who have bought these games, developed communities around them, dramatically improved the games, are now being asked in our terms to go back to the stoneage in gaming.

They knew their actions would be very detrimental to millions in their loyal base and they hid them to the very last, letting hundreds of thousands of people pre-order and set up dedicated servers etc., then at the last minute dropping this bombshell on what were there loyal customers.

Regards,

FlyRetired,

The thing is consoles do not provide near the same quality and experience of MP in these type of games that you can get through the PC, dedicated servers, mods, clans, squads, tournaments, etc.

They want PC Gamers to go back several generations of gaming to something much more basic. I am just not willing to go backwards that far and keep paying the money that I do. If this takes over PC Gaming, I am truly out of it.

Regards,

I do have sympathy for those who are in clans and meet regularly on their own servers.

It'll be interesting to note the MW2 sales figures overall, and would be worth a study of the copies sold comparing MW and MW2 at certain intervals.

I'd guess the calculations about the bottom line, always depend on the bottom line.

Interesting to see the competition react. EA/Dice is out there saying they would not treat the gaming community like Activision/IW, so perhaps this attack by Activision/IW will get us better support for upcoming PC Battlefield games.

Whatever the case, it seems that PC Gaming will depend on non-US based companies in the future. The US based companies on the most part are making console games and porting them over to PC, which in the end gets you a sub-standard PC game. Most of the exciting PC Games are coming from overseas.

Regards,

Yeah right, when EA/Dice release BF1943 on consoles first... Comes to something when EA are saying the customers are being treated badly lol

What does BF1943 being released first on the consoles have to do with anything? It's a smart business decision, and BF1943 isn't like a sequel or anything, it's a pretty small game.

FYI, Battlefield 3 is in fact being developed for PC first and foremost, I'm well aware that it hasn't been announced but when you live in the same city as DICE Sweden, and am a big gaming fan and know people, you hear quite a few things.

Activision-Blizzard is far worse than EA these days, EA have actually done a lot of quality titles recently IMO, Dead Space comes to mind as one of my top-favorites.

And if you dislike EA for making BF1943 for consoles first, then you obviously either do not understand how our capitalist society works, or do not like capitalism.

EA is in the end a company like any other, with its main goal being keeping the company alive and well, and generating enough money to fund the development of new products, considering there's a far more substantial gamerbase on consoles these days than on PC, it makes perfect sense to prioritize making the console version first, then making a PC version.

And EA seems to try to take the route of rather than simply porting the console version ala Activision, they're actually making each version custom-tailored to each platform, for example the PC version of Dragon Age: Origins is very different from the console versions.

Well, pal, it has to do with my point of games publishers making games for consoles and then porting them across to PC....to do with PC taking a back seat to consoles....to do with I can have my opinion and say what the hell I like, called freedom of speech. Or maybe you dont understand how our democratic society works, or do not like democracy.

I don't give toss about sound business decisions I only care about having to take the crumbs from the consoles table which I am sick of saying and really am tired of this debate and am going to have to accept the innevitable.

And by the way do you work for DICE? Because you certainly sound like you do.

You know, I've played the COD series from the beginning because they're lots of fun.

I wouldn't argue about them being realistic, or for using proper tactics in them.

Should I be considered a console-minded zombie because I look forward to playing MW or WAW today just for the "action". I think not, I don't own a console.

I don't really get how people see the COD games being anything other than a great looking series, rich in cinematics, and with fast-paced shooter action, which has shown to be a very successful retail game formula.

As far as I can tell, the COD formula sounds like it works just fine for guys playing the series on consoles too.

Maybe I haven't been taking my playtime in Call Of Duty serious enough, but then again, that's probably why I've had so much fun.

I wish I did, DICE is a very nice company and has very nice people in it.

And why shouldn't the PC take a backseat to consoles? The average development budget of a commercial game these days exceeds 15 million United States Dollars.

Why should they prioritize the platform with lower accessibility and lower probable profit?

Note, I am not defending poorly-made PC ports, but I am defending devs who choose to prioritize the console version and later make a GOOD PC version, even if it means delaying said PC version to ensure it's well-optimized etc.

Also sorry for coming off a bit harsh, was having a bad day.

Appology accepted

I reacted incorrectly as well so appologies for that, always difficult to tell someones tone in text. No hard feelings.

This was interesting to see:

"

DICE is paying homage to PC gamers with extra goodies in Bad Company 2.

Zoom

Sometimes PC gamers don't feel loved, especially when once-dedicated-PC-developers give all the attention and glory to consoles (you know who you are). But PC gamers are loved, it's just not vocalized on a daily level. That's why it's always music to our ears when a developer steps out and sticks up for the PC gamer.

With that said, Battlefield developer DICE thinks that PC gamers deserve extra features because they put up with more "crap" than the spoiled console gamers. According to Maximum PC, DICE community manager “Zerk16” was asked why many Battlefield: Bad Company 2 features are "dodging consoles' draft and defecting to the PC." The reason is surprising.

“The PC platform is usually expected to put up with a lot more ‘crap’ compared to consoles," he replied. "While consoles may get the game on a certain date, PC users typically have to wait much longer for the same game, but in turn, they get the game for a lower price because there are no licensing fees like consoles have, and typically they get a few more perks thrown in compared to consoles just for good measure."

He also added that the PC version of Bad Company 2 is getting more features because DICE has ignored the PC user base for the past 3 to 4 years; the upcoming PC version pays homage to those gamers. "It’s a lot of things that PC users simply deserve," he said. "If you have played games on the PC for the last ten years you would know what I’m talking about, otherwise I won’t even try to explain.”

You go boy."

Whenever some game company tells me that they're doing something so I feel loved, it's time to check six.

Whenever some game company tells me that they're doing something so I feel loved, it's time to check six.

SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO true

All I know is that what DICE says they want to do for the PC gamers...........helped me decide to "cancel" my pre-order of MW2 and pre-order BF BC2.

IMHO, I wonder if DICE sees something for the future of PC gaming? They have decided to offer their next game on the PC where it wasn't before...? right? And stay with ded servers......they may gain more players, especially from the other games.

Games devs are becoming as hard to believe as politians as of late, let's hope DICE show the rest the way...

Kotick, the Activision CEO is open in his intentions to make as much money for as long as possible from a game or series of games. He is not a gamer and he doesn't care about gamers and pretty much admitted this in public.

They aquired World of Warcraft and other pay per play games that brings in a constant flow of cash into the company. He mus thave instructed IW to do the same with MW2 and they just did. Expect more of the same from this company.

They can turn the switch when they need to sell you MW3.

Look at the money they make from the Guitar Hero and the derivatives. Same idea packaged differently as many times as possible.

Now that is not a bad thing...

I don't think someone is thinking in killing PC games in purpose, but business decisions like this will kill PC gaming...

Now, PC gamers won't (hopefully, for their own good) buy MW2. But you know what? I think we would have pre-ordered and bought MW3 and MW4 in a flash. If there were dedicated servers from them that is...

If you read a recent interview with Kotick, he sounds almost like a clinical psychopath. I wonder if that is what it takes to get on top with these multinational companies?

Regards,

Read between the lines:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=986924332

There is something unsettling about this guy...

agreed.

A lot of people(and myself) was about to buy MW2 for the PC, but cancelled it because of the lack of support for us. I played it with my friend of PS3, and I must say that I like it. Too bad they let us down

LOL
9v9 multiplayer - rubbish but I could live with that considering how small the standard maps are...
No leaning - what the hell? Obviously aimed at the spray and pray brigade. That's just like Counterstrike isn't it?
Now pay per play - COD is dead!
I was boycotting EA, but I may have to rethink that. They almost look good now!

Ok, I am going to put my two cents in here for what it is worth. The following is not directed at any particular comments made thus far regarding the PC version of CoD:MW2.

First of all, yes no dedicated servers. I agree, it is a shame that they are not supported. And yes, no lean. That one really boggles my mind. And I can understand why some might not like the idea of losing Mod support but I do not play Modded anything other the Arma 2 at the moment so I can not comment on that. However, after playing the game through single player ~1.5 times and about 10-15 hours so far of multiplayer, it is a lot of fun ON THE PC! The story in single player is still top notch. The multiplayer is still of very good quality...even with 9v9 players. Action is fast paced both sides of the coin. In fact, my friends that normally have been playing either CoD:MW and CoD:WaW are moving over to CoD:MW2 as we speak. While not having a regualar dedicated server is unfortunate, it just is not enough of a negative to keep us from doing so after having played the game for a time.

Nothing can stop the PC gaming community, apparently

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/11/16/modem-warfare-dedicated-servers-go/