Modern Warfare 2 PC will not have dedicated servers

[Zoraptor]

They are not fighting piracy, they just want everyone playing on a console to maximize profits.

You still make more $$$ on a full price PC game than on a full price console game, even though the latter is more expensive in absolute terms, because of the console licencing fees. In fact this change will increase their overheads as they will have to run the PC multiplayer stuff themselves rather than PC users running it themselves.

 

Piracy, getting a dedicated (and most importantly, captive) userbase, streamlined DLC delivery and the possibility of selling mods seems the most likely reasons. Pretty much the same as the changes to BattleNet and various bits about SC2/ D3 development on the Blizzard side.

 

The only really odd thing about it is the supposed use of Steam when MW2 seems to not even be available for preorder on it yet.

Edited October 18, 2009 by Zoraptor

[Malcador]

So that they can slowly turn PC gamers into console gamers. Like by removing dedicated servers which not only turns the PC experience into a worse experience right off the bat, but also limits the ability of the players to run mods and custom maps in multiplayer. It's all about the long term consequences.

 

Sinister. Mind you, if Modern Warfare leaves the PC platform, it's our gain

Edited October 18, 2009 by Malcador

[Oner]

So that they can slowly turn PC gamers into console gamers. Like by removing dedicated servers which not only turns the PC experience into a worse experience right off the bat, but also limits the ability of the players to run mods and custom maps in multiplayer. It's all about the long term consequences.

Sinister. Mind you, if Modern Warfare leaves the PC platform, it's our gain

You're losing me here.

[Pidesco]

Oh, get out of here!

 

PC sales were a fraction of MW's sales. They don't have some evil secret scheme to turn PC gamers into console gamers. They are doing what they can to cut the costs of the PC port by making it as close to the console version as possible.

 

They are trying to turn the PC into as much of a console as possible. Also, I didn't say it's an evil secret scheme. They are just following the game plan they feel will allow them to be more commercially, successful.

 

 

You still make more $$$ on a full price PC game than on a full price console game, even though the latter is more expensive in absolute terms, because of the console licencing fees. In fact this change will increase their overheads as they will have to run the PC multiplayer stuff themselves rather than PC users running it themselves.

 

Piracy, getting a dedicated (and most importantly, captive) userbase, streamlined DLC delivery and the possibility of selling mods seems the most likely reasons. Pretty much the same as the changes to BattleNet and various bits about SC2/ D3 development on the Blizzard side.

 

The only really odd thing about it is the supposed use of Steam when MW2 seems to not even be available for preorder on it yet.

 

 

Other than piracy being a reason for anything, overall, I agree with you.

 

My beef with them, is that they are trying to turn the PC into a closed system for gaming, which is more or less negating the point of PCs. I can certainly understand why they're doing it, but I don't really agree that it is the best way to be successful, and I jsut like the notion of open systems in general. It's the same reason why don't like the iPod, for example.

[Purkake]

Most games that have a console as the leading platform end up like that, it's not anything new or particularly exciting. It's not a matter of turning PCs into consoles, but a matter of there being few PC-only games and companies not spending money to make the PC port any different from the console ones.

[Pidesco]

In any case, today, adding dedicated server support to a game must be free, especially if the last iteration of their game supported it.

[Purkake]

If you have to make is specially for the PC port, it most certainly won't be free. Anything concerning the net code will probably need way more testing than other non-net code related stuff.

[Pidesco]

If you have to make is specially for the PC port, it most certainly won't be free. Anything concerning the net code will probably need way more testing than other non-net code related stuff.

 

 

Yes, but all the work has already been done previously. It's the same multiplayer game as before with the same net code.

[Purkake]

Are you sure it's the exact same net code?

 

Even if it is, maybe they wanted a unified system for future's sake?

[Pidesco]

Are you sure it's the exact same net code?

 

Even if it is, maybe they wanted a unified system for future's sake?

 

Well, obviously I'm not 100% sure, and there may be minor improvements to the code from game to game, but I'd be really surprised if they repeated the same work year in and year out.

 

They probably just feel the new matchmaking system is a potentiallly excellent source of revenue and that dedicated servers would be taking away from that revenue. More control equals more money.

[Purkake]

If there's anyone other than Apple who wants total control, it's probably Activision. Also having it on their servers will mean that they will be able to deal with whatever problems there might be like cheating and whatnot.

 

The bottom line is that there is not secret conspiracy against PC gaming, it's just the way things are going at the moment.

[Nepenthe]

Oh, get out of here!

 

PC sales were a fraction of MW's sales. They don't have some evil secret scheme to turn PC gamers into console gamers. They are doing what they can to cut the costs of the PC port by making it as close to the console version as possible.

 

Since the large majority of people will play it on the console why waste time and resources to make the PC version special. It's just a way to sell a few more units.

 

Mmh, probably mostly that, as well as no longer off-loading the dlc development costs/returns expectations to the console side. OTOH my decision to not pay the full price for my (console) copy of this game is becoming quite firm.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

[mkreku]

I don't actually mind this change (mostly because I don't understand what's so bad about it). What I DO mind about is that this will probably chase away the competitive PC online gamers, the sales will be worse and I'll have to listen to Bobby Kotick explain that the PC is dying as a gaming platform because of piracy.

[Syraxis]

I don't actually mind this change (mostly because I don't understand what's so bad about it). What I DO mind about is that this will probably chase away the competitive PC online gamers, the sales will be worse and I'll have to listen to Bobby Kotick explain that the PC is dying as a gaming platform because of piracy.

 

Does activision actually support the PC platform other than Infinity Ward/Treyarch (that other studio.)

Edited October 19, 2009 by Syraxis

[Purkake]

I don't actually mind this change (mostly because I don't understand what's so bad about it). What I DO mind about is that this will probably chase away the competitive PC online gamers, the sales will be worse and I'll have to listen to Bobby Kotick explain that the PC is dying as a gaming platform because of piracy.

 

Does activision actually support the PC platform other than Infinity Ward/Treyarch (that other studio.)

 

They published Prototype, Wolfenstein and X-Men Origins: Wolverine. They'd happily put the games out on Atari 7800, ColecoVision and Sega CD if it would get them more money.

[entrerix]

Oh, get out of here!

 

PC sales were a fraction of MW's sales. They don't have some evil secret scheme to turn PC gamers into console gamers. They are doing what they can to cut the costs of the PC port by making it as close to the console version as possible.

 

Since the large majority of people will play it on the console why waste time and resources to make the PC version special. It's just a way to sell a few more units.

 

 

just quoting this for truth.

[alanschu]

Disappointing, though ultimately it doesn't affect me. My DM style matches nowadays are all just random servers anyway, so it won't be any different for me to connect to an IW server as random joe-blow server.

 

On the plus side, I doubt there will be servers that have rules that limit suppression fire. I still remember when I got kicked from a server one time because I used the M249 to keep some guys pinned down and let my allies flank them with grenades. In the rare time that an actual military tactic worked (well, a lot of the people complaining were the ones that decided to run INTO my fire in spite of me shooting a lot), I got kicked for "spamming bullets."

 

 

Though I am REALLY looking forward to the coop!!!!!!

[Deadly_Nightshade]

...I got kicked for "spamming bullets."

 

[alanschu]

That was actually the reason explained to me too.

 

 

The rules of that server were no jumping and no spamming. I figured the spamming meant filling up chat with junk, but I guess it really meant "Only n00bs use machine guns and I don't like dying to them while I take my time and aim my assault rifle at you."

Edited October 20, 2009 by alanschu

[Malcador]

Heh, sort of like the old days of FA and using an M203 was automatically "nade spamming".

[alanschu]

I have played on servers that don't allow the M203 grenade launcher too haha. Though none of my kits have an m203 so it's not an issue for me.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Well you have to admit grenade launchers are sort of a cheap tactic.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

 

I think that pretty much sums it up.

[alanschu]

I'm getting a bit tired of that meme haha.