• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Hubris and Bullshit: Modern Warfare 2 PC will not allow dedicated servers.

Twig

Banned
jim-jam bongs said:
:lol

Indeed, your post makes me think they might well be.
If you're implying that I'm too senstivie, then, lolololol

Let me tell you how much I have invested in this:
 

Victrix

*beard*
Update: Lack of party chat still fucking sucks ass.

Really enjoy reforming party 5 times before everyone gets in a game. And the people who got dropped can't tell you, so you have to check, constantly.
 

Opiate

Member
Mrbob said:
Sales numbers can be twisted though. Is he talking units sold or total revenue? MW2 is selling for at least 10 dollar more a pop than MW1 so it is possible it sold less units and made more money.

Also, MW1 did have more of a continual build up in sales. MW2 was going to have a massive first week regardless since it is riding the success of the first game. I really don't think first week numbers prove much. Long term is the bigger issue.

Your second point is far more important than the first. CoD4 had the best legs of any game this generation on the 360, including Halo: CoD6 has thus far shown far shorter legs, as a direct consequence of a much stronger up front sale.

Now, if PC sales are also more front loaded, but sales are only up slightly so far, that's a bad indicator for LTD sales matching CoD4. I assume that if PC sales were up some huge amount -- 75% or more, let's say -- IW would have mentioned it.

This is hardly conclusive proof of anything, but I really would never take "better first day sales!" of a huge, highly anticipated sequel as a sure sign of better sales, and in most cases, if sales were only up slightly, I would predict a lower LTD.
 
TheOneGuy said:
It's also goddamn Penny Arcade.

Consider the context. Reasonable human beings will.
So making inflammatory, disingenuous, hyperbolic and inaccurate arguments is perfectly fine so long as the source is known to do so often?

There's a word for thinking that way, but "reasonable" is not it.
 

Twig

Banned
faceless007 said:
So making inflammatory, disingenuous, hyperbolic and inaccurate arguments is perfectly fine so long as the source is known to do so often?

There's a word for thinking that way, but "reasonable" is not it.
Man you are quite dense.
 

Twig

Banned
You expect me to argue with some internet subway vagrant? I am above you in every way imaginable.

Step off, kid. Step off.
 

Cohsae

Member
Victrix said:
Update: Lack of party chat still fucking sucks ass.

Really enjoy reforming party 5 times before everyone gets in a game. And the people who got dropped can't tell you, so you have to check, constantly.
Skype man, Skype.
 

Twig

Banned
faceless007 said:
First you said his audience was reasonable people. Now you're saying he's just trolling like always. Which is it?
I never said his audience was reasonable people.

I said reasonable people will not be bothered by what he says.

There... is a huge difference between the two statements. Clearly this is too much for you to handle, so I'm going to be the bigger man and step out of this argument before you hurt yourself. Toodles.
 
Only if you accept the premise that reasonable people don't get bothered by things that are wrong. I'm pretty sure the opposite is true though.
 

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
mariushk2.gif


Don't end up like Jason High, dudes.
 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
TheOneGuy, are you following some step-by-step manual of how to troll people on the internet or something? You're really nailing all of the important steps.
 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
TheOneGuy said:
I was just trying to defend Tycho and it went so horribly, horribly wrong. ): ): ):

I'm not sure why you would even want to defend him. He has proven to be an asshole and a hypocrite through his various postings. "Doing it for the lulz" isn't an excuse for anything outside of 4chan.
 

Enosh

Member
kitch9 said:
Sooooo, I thought I'd try my level 4 ass on the PC again last night. I should get to play against some guys at my level right? I've got a choice of a massive 3 fucking guns and fuck all else, everybody else will be the same right? The matchmaking shit IW have shoved down our throats will make shit fair right?

Noooooooo, what the fuck is this shit I got last night!?!?

First attempt at team deathmatch, I was but on a server where the lowest guy was level 50, second attempt the lowest guy was 55.

My last attempt put me up against a party of level 70 sons of bitches all with the tag GS next to their name.

I'm running around with my little pea shooter and my knob hanging out, whilst those twats have akimbo shotguns that somehow have the ability to snipe me half the way across the map.......Don't get me started on the constant harriers, pave lows and fucking nukes that I CAN'T FUCKING USE.

The exclusive text chat that the PC version has treated me to 10 mins of "LOL....Owned.", "Noob cannon fodder LOL." and "Love it when the matchmaking gives me noobs to kill."

Its even harder than COD4 to get into on-line. At least I could pick a server that had noobs only in the server name, but this shit is fucked up.

Fuck you IW.

1. matchmaking isn't based on rank, it would be stupid to base it on rank
2. if it is just like in live you need an "adjustment period" in which matchmaking calculates your skill, thus the chance of getting games with people of similar skill improves the more you play.
3. "At least I could pick a server that had noobs only in the server name" which were usualy full of people looking for easy kills
 

kitch9

Banned
Enosh said:
1. matchmaking isn't based on rank, it would be stupid to base it on rank
2. if it is just like in live you need an "adjustment period" in which matchmaking calculates your skill, thus the chance of getting games with people of similar skill improves the more you play.
3. "At least I could pick a server that had noobs only in the server name" which were usualy full of people looking for easy kills

I got the Scar and just came top in Team Deathmatch a little while later. I may have been a touch hasty I feel.....

The Scar with stopping power has made things a little easier, but I wish it had a touch more ammo.

On a side note, I have this for the PS3 too, and the PC version still shits all over that. I would like games of this size on dedicated servers and it would be awesome.
 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
out0v0rder said:
I feel like the only person who hasn't bought this.

You most definitely are not the only one. None of my real life friends or Steam friends have bought it and they all like FPS. I also, of course, haven't bought it.
 

Deadly

Member
out0v0rder said:
I feel like the only person who hasn't bought this.
Nope, I haven't gotten it either. Unless someone gifts it to me or I somehow get it for free, I doubt I ever will get it either.
 

G0DLIKE

Member
I bought it and couldn't stand the often unplayable connections so stopped playing after a week. The main issue I had was that even with a good connection, host advantage was always present.

This is a game where even a 50+ ping advantage can really damage the competitiveness. I don't know how anyone can go from CoD4 PC to MW2 PC without being disgusted.
 
Don't know if this was posted somewhere else, but here's another problem with the PC version.

http://www.destructoid.com/modern-warfare-2-getting-people-s-internet-shut-down--157257.phtml

Another argument in favor of dedicated servers has been made today, with gamers complaining that Modern Warfare 2's precious IW.net has led to threats of online termination from ISPs. According to reports, players have been accused of "running servers on their home connection" and "excessive file sharing through peer to peer connections."

"I received a letter from Time-Warner Cable," writes one angry customer who had a narrow escape. "... The letter basically says that they think I have a virus thats sending/receiving information ... They say 'We ask you to bear in mind that continued violations of the road runner acceptable use policy can result in suspension or even termination of your road runner account.'
 

RavenFox

Banned
Enosh said:
1. matchmaking isn't based on rank, it would be stupid to base it on rank
2. if it is just like in live you need an "adjustment period" in which matchmaking calculates your skill, thus the chance of getting games with people of similar skill improves the more you play.
3. "At least I could pick a server that had noobs only in the server name" which were usualy full of people looking for easy kills
You haven't played WAW I see.
Crewnh said:
Don't know if this was posted somewhere else, but here's another problem with the PC version.

http://www.destructoid.com/modern-warfare-2-getting-people-s-internet-shut-down--157257.phtml
what the hell? That's some fucked up shit.
 

Archie

Second-rate Anihawk

VaLiancY

Member
out0v0rder said:
I feel like the only person who hasn't bought this.

I've played it on the Xbox 360 and if the multiplayer is the same as the PC version. It really is a step back in a lot of ways but I always have Team Fortress 2. Time go to practice my airshots!
 

RavenFox

Banned
Archie said:
Wouldn't that mean that every P2P game could get the same treatment from ISPs? I have shat on IWNet and MW2 PC, but I really don't buy that story (yet) especially since it comes from the IW forums where there is alot of bitterness and jaded people.
People have allegedly been downgraded to dial-up, had to call their ISPs to explain themselves, or faced extra charges on their phone bills thanks to IW.net using customers' computers to host games.
Seems to be quite a number of folks no? Consoles data is registered or something like that. ISP service knows.
 

Twig

Banned
RavenFox said:
Seems to be quite a number of folks no? Consoles data is registered or something like that. ISP service knows.
I'm with Archie.

Every P2P game would have to suffer from this if it was true.
 

RavenFox

Banned
TheOneGuy said:
I'm with Archie.

Every P2P game would have to suffer from this if it was true.
Weird type of stuff to make up. I'm sure there is a difference in how IW does the PC side of things.
 

Twig

Banned
RavenFox said:
Weird type of stuff to make up. I'm sure there is a difference in how IW does the PC side of things.
People make weird shit up when they hate things.

Example: I hate MW2 because it killed my baby.

You see what you want to see.
 

ghst

thanks for the laugh
TheOneGuy said:
I'm with Archie.

Every P2P game would have to suffer from this if it was true.

i had alot of problems with all p2p based team games back when i was with virgin broadband. 6 players and up became unplayable in dawn of war 2 and demigod, and there was no way i could use skype without reducing gaf coh downs into wheezing chugalugs.

a bunch of people reported similar problems on the dg forums and it turned out to be a form of bandwidth throttling specifically targeted at multiple p2p connections, with the official line from tech support amounting to "eat a dick, pirates."

so i wouldn't aim this one squarely at infantile ward, as convenient as that would be.
 

Twig

Banned
Yes I think that's the whole point of the original guy bitching and moaning about it.

You don't have to tell me; I won't touch MW2 with a 50 foot pole in its current state.
 

ch0mp

Member
Archie said:
Wouldn't that mean that every P2P game could get the same treatment from ISPs? I have shat on IWNet and MW2 PC, but I really don't buy that story (yet) especially since it comes from the IW forums where there is alot of bitterness and jaded people.

Most p2p games don't have 17 connections at once... p2p is much more suited to RTS games and the like with their lower data usage.
 
You would have to be downloading a lot of other stuff on top of constantly being chosen as the host in MW2 to be throttled by your ISP. Just playing P2P games alone, even 12 hours a day wouldn't even approach most ISP's bandwidth limits.
 

SlickVic

Member
ch0mp said:
Most p2p games don't have 17 connections at once... p2p is much more suited to RTS games and the like with their lower data usage.

Well isn't it the same setup for MW2 on 360? Doesn't LIVE still make one player host even in 18 player matches in this game?

I'm not really seeing why this would affect PC MW2 players only and not 360 players with both running P2P systems (unless IWNet is somehow using a lot of extra bandwidth).
 

Twig

Banned
evil solrac v3.0 said:
he's not worth defending. why get your panties in a bunch over a guy who wants to see the way you play games dissapear?
lol wat r u doin r u dum i tink u r dum
 

kitch9

Banned
RavenFox said:
Seems to be quite a number of folks no? Consoles data is registered or something like that. ISP service knows.

ISP's know you are connected to Live and PSN, due to the IP address you connect to, and most let this slide as it will be the reason a lot actually have broadband. There were a few instances where LIVE and PSN traffic was getting throttled by ISP's filters a while ago.

IWNET will not exist according to them so I assume they will treat it like file sharing P2P traffic.

I know BT throttle my mates connection at peak times when he plays MW2. Peak is most of the day out of working hours FYI.
 
How would you even test your mod? Betting this would be something a little more simple than what the term "mod tools" typically entails. Maybe skins or something.
 
Top Bottom