• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

SHould I get COD:MW2???

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Regs said:
Removing dedicated servers I think was a terrible idea, yet even when we had dedicated servers we still had whiners. I had over a thousand hours of play time in MW1, and I heard everyone still complain about the lag, hackers, and bullet spam. Now we have the same but with less choice.
Click to expand...

Yeah I think it's pretty obvious now that removing dedicated serer support was a terrible idea, it'll be interesting to see if they do anything to try to fix it.
 
Regs said:
You want to start a witch hunt. It's just not going to happen.
Click to expand...

I don't want to start anything. I just simply stated that there are obvious hackers already and don't support IW due to their ill conceived removal of dedicated servers which helps the community fight this sort of thing.

I've been playing shooters competitively since Quake 2 CTF. I think I know when someone is obviously hacking or not thank you very much. But you want to keep chiming in with your nonsense about being accused of hacking 1000 times and witch hunts. get over it.
 
What just gets sad is when you have servers where you cannot even police them against hackers. IW's news press release about the whole no hackers/cheaters thing on IWnet was laughable.

Within the release day, there were already non-detectable aimbots and wallhacks out....

And now, theres cracks out to allow people who pirated to play on the legit servers with the people who purchased the game. Like...thats just...sad. I dont see how people could like that type of multiplayer experience...
 
I was semi interested in this game until I heard about it being more like a console game and not having dedicated servers. Good job insanity ward

Sticking with Unreal Tournament III and COD World At War

lets hope Treyarch doesn't follow suit
 
shurato said:
If someone is camping and shooting through bushes (that you cannot walk through or jump over) and killing several people behind it, what do you think that is?
Click to expand...

the way the game is supposed to work? You do know that bullets can penetrate light walls and such, and last I checked, leaves were not very good at stopping bullets...
 
QuantumPion said:
Does anyone beside me think the game just...well, sucks overall? It plays like one of those old light-gun arcade games. Unlimited bad guys constantly spawning in fixed locations which have no AI other than "spray bullets in this direction". And the graphics aren't particularly impressive either. It's just...boring to me. I thought maybe I just got sick of FPS's in general but I still play CS and L4D frequently and thoroughly enjoy them.

I'm banging my head against the wall trying to figure out how this is the best selling game of all time. The only thing I can come up with is that there is a whole generation of retard gamers whose first game was Halo, thought that it was awesome, and therefore think this game is mega-freaking-super-duper by comparison. :hmm:
Click to expand...

Interesting because I don't find L4d or CS fun at all.
 
Im finding the 1 playergame surprisingly enjoyable.

Only gripe is the voices are too quiet compared to the ambiant sound, i ahve to keep reading the subtitles 🙁
 
MW2 is not better than COD4 combine that with closed multi player, barely any single-player time, and nonsensical story make this game not even close to worth the $10 more-than-any-other-game asking price.

What's funny is it seems like any no name company were to release this crap and reviewers would have panned it appropriately so. But no, not IW, they seem to generate an almost Pavlovian positive response in the press and amongst many gamers based on past deeds. It's bullshit and this is the worst game ever from them. Save your money or try it somehow first.
 
Last edited:
I enjoyed the single player and I don't have any problem with the MP. I gotta say it is more arcade like then COD4.

I do think COD4 was a better game. I am enjoying the MP even without the dedicated servers. I had my doubts though and I have not personally experienced anyone hacking. Maybe I'm just lucky I don't know.
 
GodlessAstronomer said:
If you are interested in any of the following, you may want to look for another game
  • Mods
  • Dedicated servers
  • Custom maps
  • Custom rules
  • Greater than 18 players
  • Leaning
  • Console (as in, pressing "tilde" console)
  • A developer who gives a crap about the PC platform
Click to expand...
I know nothing about CoD4 but I would consider getting the first MW if I could find it inexpensively (maybe $15). Did the first one have all of that? Was a map editor released?

I take it that MW2 doesn't offer that and got consolized?
 
What is a "dedicated server"?

Is that where the developers set up servers for people to play on?

What's wrong with playing on privately-owned public servers set up by gaming enthusiasts? (Or does "dedicated server" refer to private servers?)
 
WhipperSnapper said:
What is a "dedicated server"?

Is that where the developers set up servers for people to play on?

What's wrong with playing on privately-owned public servers set up by gaming enthusiasts? (Or does "dedicated server" refer to private servers?)
Click to expand...

People setting up their own servers are dedicated servers. Every popular multiplayer PC game has run on dedicated servers pretty much. It allows you to pick your map, save favorite servers, and put in mods such as no grenades (or at least less of them), custom skins and all sorts of stuff. Now all you can do is select a game mode and you're thrown into a random game with a random map with the same rules that can't be changed.
 
gorcorps said:
People setting up their own servers are dedicated servers. Every popular multiplayer PC game has run on dedicated servers pretty much. It allows you to pick your map, save favorite servers, and put in mods such as no grenades (or at least less of them), custom skins and all sorts of stuff. Now all you can do is select a game mode and you're thrown into a random game with a random map with the same rules that can't be changed.
Click to expand...

So MW2 doesn't allow for privately-owned servers? Does that mean that you can only play on servers set up by the publisher or gaming studio? (Why would they want to do that since that means having to pay to maintain the servers?)
 
WhipperSnapper said:
So MW2 doesn't allow for privately-owned servers? Does that mean that you can only play on servers set up by the publisher or gaming studio? (Why would they want to do that since that means having to pay to maintain the servers?)
Click to expand...

Yup, you can only play on IW servers. Why would they do this? Greed. IW has hopped on the DLC bandwagon and the only way they could truly sell DLC is if they eliminated dedicated servers from hosting custom mods/maps. Why would you want to pay for DLC if you could just hop on a server with free custom content of the same quality? This move has eliminated the modding community (one that is present in almost every FPS), it has destroyed the existence of clans in this game (clans can't host their own servers), and it has removed my support for IW.
 
Chriscross3234 said:
Yup, you can only play on IW servers. Why would they do this? Greed. IW has hopped on the DLC bandwagon and the only way they could truly sell DLC is if they eliminated dedicated servers from hosting custom mods/maps. Why would you want to pay for DLC if you could just hop on a server with free custom content of the same quality? This move has eliminated the modding community (one that is present in almost every FPS), it has destroyed the existence of clans in this game (clans can't host their own servers), and it has removed my support for IW.
Click to expand...

There are no servers at all. You just host it on your pc.
 
Chriscross3234 said:
Yup, you can only play on IW servers. Why would they do this? Greed. IW has hopped on the DLC bandwagon and the only way they could truly sell DLC is if they eliminated dedicated servers from hosting custom mods/maps. Why would you want to pay for DLC if you could just hop on a server with free custom content of the same quality? This move has eliminated the modding community (one that is present in almost every FPS), it has destroyed the existence of clans in this game (clans can't host their own servers), and it has removed my support for IW.
Click to expand...

Do you even have proof of this?
 
Chriscross3234 said:
Yup, you can only play on IW servers. Why would they do this? Greed. IW has hopped on the DLC bandwagon and the only way they could truly sell DLC is if they eliminated dedicated servers from hosting custom mods/maps. Why would you want to pay for DLC if you could just hop on a server with free custom content of the same quality? This move has eliminated the modding community (one that is present in almost every FPS), it has destroyed the existence of clans in this game (clans can't host their own servers), and it has removed my support for IW.
Click to expand...
That's not even the issue. There are no servers, period. IWnet is peer to peer, meaning of the 18 people in game, one person is hosting the game on his/her system. This means 2 things: 1) your connection to the game is through a residential connection (read: crap) and 2) the host has 0 ping, while you have anywhere from 100ms-500ms, since upload speeds are typically much slower on residential connections (see above).

Disclosure: I haven't played the game, nor will I spend $60 for the game and have far less features implemented in it. Best case scenario, the MP game will be mildly inferior to MW1; worst case scenario, the MP will be a catastrophic clusterfuck.

I'm amazed that they decided they could pull this shit and still charge more for the game, but their sales totals show that they are far more competent businessmen than I.
 
pontifex said:
Do you even have proof of this?
Click to expand...

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2009/01/activisions-bobby-kotick-brings-cash-but-not-heart.ars

do you really need proof? Kotick has reiterated many times that he only wants franchises that he can milk; for example, COD trading off every year between IW and treyarch. It's not difficult to make this connection. He wants to have a game every year, with as few updates as possible to minimize cost that he can sell for more cash.

The public is developing content and distributing it for free? Lock out mods by not providing a developer. Map packs are being sold on the Xbox but are made available for free on the PC? Develop a system where the gamer is essentially forced to buy the map packs or be unable to participate in online play (IWnet).

Why else would they take their quality down as far as possible? They're squeezing the margins. Put less and less into dev costs, and milk them for more and more. The hilarious thing (and I forget where i read this) is that the dev budget for the whole fucking game is reported to be around 60 million, but they spent 150-200 million on marketing. Is it normal to spend 3x as much cash convincing people to buy your shit than you actually spent making it? Forgive my ignorance of marketing, but it sounds preposterous. The funnier (read: tragic) part of all this is that they're squeezing the bottom end, but milking the top end by charging more. I swear Kotick wakes up rubbing it out to a giant MW2 poster.
 
Sounds like the same capitalism mindset that makes the U.S. tick... why so bent out of shape over it? I don't agree with what they did, but I can't blame them for trying something to get money for the maps they put time and money into developing and play testing. You aren't FORCED to buy a map pack at all, and I hate when people claim such a stupid thing.
 
gorcorps said:
Sounds like the same capitalism mindset that makes the U.S. tick... why so bent out of shape over it? I don't agree with what they did, but I can't blame them for trying something to get money for the maps they put time and money into developing and play testing. You aren't FORCED to buy a map pack at all, and I hate when people claim such a stupid thing.
Click to expand...

Ordinarily I'd agree with you, and in fact, I'm not mad they pulled this, just disappointed. I understand it's in their best interests, but it's decidedly against mine. So, I'm voting with my wallet. I'm not buying the game, and if they pull this shit in the future, I won't buy it then either. I've been following battlefield: Bad company 2 as long as I was following MW2, and from what I can see, BC2 is shaping up to be a FAR better game than MW2. So, in march, I'll buy that. And I'll also participate in the PC beta next month, and I'll ALSO be able to see how I like the close to final product when they offer a *GASP* DEMO of the game in jan/feb.

Can't wait.

On your other point, I can easily see how they could provide DLC and force you to buy it. Wanna join MP? What if it keeps sending you to games where the map is one you don't have? Or, even worse, requires you to update in order to even join MP? I don't know if this will come to pass, but it sure seems like it will, and if it does, you have a bricked game that you paid $60 for to only have SP. Hopefully it won't happen, but with IWnet, they decide whether it happens or not. You no longer have a say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top