Infinity Ward Responds to Modern Warfare 2 Controversy

[KeyMaster45]

In case you missed the sound and fury over Infinity Ward's surprising decision to drop traditional dedicated server-based-multiplayer in the PC version of Modern Warfare 2 in favor of a console-esque peer-to-peer matchmaking service, uh...here you go.

Missed the sound and fury? I think that's a gross understatement to the sheer magnitude of the nerd rage unleashed by this decision. Right around the time the first story was printed...I literally felt a disturbance in the force, like millions of nerds screamed for blood all at the same time.

I'm not an fps person so I had no interest in this game anyway; though that trailer they did of D.C. burning perked my interest. I might rent it when it comes out.

 

[NitrousOxid3]

-Faster: Push a button. Wait couple seconds to a minute or two. Done.

How is that different to TF2's finding a server function. In fact it's the same process. FEAR2 (or Rainbow Six Vegas 2 for other examples) however is not, which uses an MM system. You have to log in from the main menu > select multiplayer > select ranked or unranked > fill out the information > Click search > click the server....

-Easier: No setting up filters, pings, or anything like that. MM does it all automatically, using general settings like desired gametype. No need to know how to manage servers either - P2P is user-friendly.

Easier itself is subjective. You ridicule other people for posting anectodes and yet you commit one yourself.

I have no problem with sever searching on TF2. There's tabs at the top of the server listing window that allows me to sort games by an order of my liking. And again MM does not work like that. That's the ideal. Rainbow Six Vegas 2 for example assumes to search based on your skills and connection type, I still bump into lagfest games. P2P can be argued as being unfriendly, because of instability issues the host may have in retrospect to the users location, connection type, other users on the server. Dedicated Servers have a huge limit for bandwidth... an individual not so much, that's why Dedicated Servers cost money. The more players you have in your game; the more bandwidth they consume; this causes high latency (or Ping). High latency is the evidence of server lag: Your computer is talking first with the host directly and because your download rate may not equal the host's upload; you get slow feedback... or for a better picture, lag.

-More reliable: Since your playing doesn't rely on the whims of a server host, or if someone feels like being a dick, you get a more reliable online experience than servers, which are hit and miss.

See above. MM systems use P2P hosting, which itself falls under many variables that revolve around the consumption of bandwidth. And since I've played (Verizon FIOS 15< 2^) RB6V2 and FEAR2, their latency was a lot more inconsistent than the experiences I have on TF2 on servers with low latency. This however is also more perspective, again another anecdote of your own. More Reliable is perspective, frankly DS is winning in my opinion judging by my experience.

-Self-regulating: While servers depend on individual rules and enforcement, MM is based on 1 rules set, and is universally enforced by one or more official enities. Get banned on a server? Find another server. Get banned in MM? Find another game, 'cause you're done punk.

How is that at all relevant? What are you accusing Dedicated Servers for in this statement because really I see no difference when I'm on a Dedicated Server on TF2 that happens to be moderated. If a player is being a douche, the mod kicks and/or bans them for indecent behavior. The difference there being actually for me Dedicated Servers is more user friendly since it gives choices.

-Fair: MM gives everyone an equal chance to get something they like. It promotes variety, while servers stagnate and strangle it. It doesn't please everyone, but cuts no one out. It breaks the back of team-stackers, gives everyone an equal chance of getting a griefer, and generally keeps all the positives and negatives in a nice equillbrium.

Actually if you study your connection rates, the host in PC P2P games gets the benefit. So yes... it actually does cut people out. I don't know what chart you look at here. Those with the best connection are more up to speed but those with slower connections do not get auto balanced for the sake of the host. They operate split seconds faster and in competitive gaming, those split seconds matter. Dedicated Servers can be modded or set to assign again team stacking, it's rather easy once you learn it. Again, this comes down to the favor ability of choices and control. Another moot point.

-Player Control: MM offers basically the same flexibilty as servers, without the work. MM systems offer many stock filter options, such as Deathmatch, Objective, Big Teams, etc. usually with a little something for everyone. Further almost all MMs offer Private Matches and Party Lobbies where friends can get togther before looking for a game, or to join their own custom game wth any number of tweakable options, for everything from screwing around to serious competition.

Once again... how is this considered a rebuttal? You can do this rather simply in Dedicated Servers, it just takes a little time to learn the set up. And since you're trying to use this as another anecdote to prove a moot point, you have yet to explain how it works any "better" as the best interest for the PC community. Your game types... is easy to sort out in TF2 by clicking the top tab and sorting in order by game type and choose accordingly to your desired destination. Shit, Crysis Wars is another good example. You can have private only and friend servers, last I checked there were some password protected games out there; more power to em.

You have no qualms restricting the fun and freedom of the people you cut out of playing what they like when you have nothing but 2Fort, Karkand or de_dust servers, but when someone levels the playing field you cry foul and bawl and ***** and call home to momma.

There's so much wrong with this statement. And it's irrelevant for a few reasons, one being that you're accusing the PC community here for enforcing values on the Consoles... nobody has done that. Grant it, there's people putting the consoles down which I don't care to get into; it's a preference - so there's no right or wrong when it comes to preferred platform. What people are doing here is trying keep the favorite method of playing online strictly to the PC so that they are capable of enjoying it, grant it differently, equally much. And Dedicated Servers are an important part to that because they keep consistency and maintain availability. And that's what it barrels down to. This is also one of MM's worst features, servers are not available if nobody is on to host.... Take a look at FEAR2.

really hope to see the PC market drop underneath their feet. Only way to prove a point now.

That's a hope indeed. CoD4 was made popular on the PC due to these important factors that make TF2, CS:S, Crysis WARS, etc still playable while you can go on FEAR2 and the servers are empty (despite being the descendant of a widely competitive FPS, FEAR).

 

[MR T3D]

dedicated servers are simply better than playing hosts for the sake of other clients, and are a better for everyone.

 

[NitrousOxid3]

dedicated servers are simply better than playing hosts for the sake of other clients, and are a better for everyone.

It gets even more complicated than that. There's plenty of factors that come into play that ensures perfect latency. And on average it's hard to encounter a game consisting of six or more people while having the gameplay remain constant.

 

[hobo_welf]

You're all still arguing about the game when I just pointed out that Bobby Kotick is the anti-christ! What is wrong with you people?!

 

[Hexley]

I'm not a heavy fps player, but I do play FPS on both my PC and my 360. I don't really care for matchmaking and I would truly rather they not change the PC version of the game. The nature of console services like Xbox Live makes for much better facilitation of matchmaking in my opinion in that anyone on the console is most likely playing a game at that very moment and would be down to play whatever game their friends are playing. The way you play with friends on consoles makes matchmaking work for me, but when I'm not playing with friends I begin to loathe matchmaking since it's only fun for me when it's me and a couple friends going from game to game.

The PC is very very different for online gaming ( for me at least ), in most games on PC I don't want my friends in any given game to know that I'm on the computer because half the time I'm doing one of the other million things I can be doing on the computer and don't want to play that specific game. It's different on consoles since there's primarily only one reason I get on the console, to play games. Thus I much prefer the dedicated server system in many PC games since I can keep servers on a favorites list and alot of times play with the same people that I enjoyed playing with on a server and make friends that way. On the PC, which is something that I'm usually not playing games on, when I DO decide to start playing a game I really don't want to form a party or go through the trouble of making a private match just so I can play with familiar people. Since the servers never change, I can usually play with a familiar community of people on my favorite servers.

Though I do not object to the matchmaking concept in making it easier for people who want to just jump in and play to do so ( for that purpose ). I do not like them taking away the ability for people to set-up specific spots to game at.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

They... they can't be doing something so stupid!

Ok, read first post and jump to the last so this has all probably been said but... damn, it needs repeating. There is so many damn reasons I don't know where to start... lets pick three at random, here here and... here.

PIIIIING: For those who don't know, I have some backing in networking as many here probably do. In networking your faced with the common question of how do we have dozens of people connecting together in one place without putting too much strain on any individual part of that network. The answer: DEDICATED SERVERS! Yes, if you really can't get away from having many people connecting to a single node of information then dedicated servers are the way to go. In this system each individual person is limited only by their own hardware and connection, while the server is build to handle the load via more specialised hardware and much, MUCH, larger 'pipelines.'

Now if we where to take p2p we have one of the players turned into the server. The vast majority of rigs out there are NOT made to handle such things as being the server as well as running the client simultaneously while juggling what can be dozens of connections at once. Even if we have a high end gaming rig, like mine that just died *sniffs,* that could handle all of that, then you have the fact we are connecting through a home line! Outside of a few insane people able to afford optic fibre cables most people are connecting through much slower lines designed for single person or home network use. These lines will NOT handle the massive amounts of data flow in near the simultaneous streams required.

Mine, for an example and I am Australian here so don't laugh, is I believe 1.5 mbit down and 256 kbit up and that is costing an arm and a leg to get down here. That sort of bottle neck would at least double, and if you get enough people quadrupedal, the amount of time your ping actually takes and often does mean the difference between life and death.

HAX!:
Another downside of a P2P system is server side cheating. Of course we can already set up a dedicated server and cheat the hell out of it but this is uncommon and nearly unheard of. Simply because the vast majority of dedicated servers are actually run by businesses who don't really care about what is happening on the server, but see it as marketing. Even if they are not sponsored by ISPs, who are wise enough to realise it is a small price to pay to market to millions of gamers, and by individual people these are people who are putting cash into their servers. They want them to be cheat free and friendly environments that we will want to return to, again and again, to validate why they are wasting their money so.

Now take that to P2P and we have systems where people are able to create games knowing they will be the server and more then a few people out there will feel the urge to cheat. As anonymous on the internet ensure arseholes, this new system will allow cheaters the very same illusion. By starting a new game they create a server that they have full control over, right down to removing cheat prevention, and the knowledge that they can recreate over and over again when they are caught out. This means it would be even harder for us to avoid cheaters.

Third: Great, I've forgotten the third technical part... maybe I bundled it into 1 by doing hardware and line limitations. Maybe not. I guess the third point will now have to be... ummm.... irresponsible behaviour? no no, that is more like cheaters where you no longer can ban their arses from dedicated servers....

Ahh, that's a good one that all gamers will be interested in: PLAYABILITY!
Dedicated servers increase the games playability by reducing the chances of having idiots on a server, sadly you can't remove completely on public games. With dedicated servers we all end up generating a list of a handful that we regularly roam to. We generate that list because the regular people found within said server have given us fun experiences in the past. Over time we even have made tactics with some of these people, a understanding on how each other plays and how to utilise that for and against our friends.

Remove dedicated servers and the only way you can be sure of a semi-decent game outside of luck is to stay playing with a small group of friends. That means we can only play multilayer games by consent of a group and that idea bothers me a lot. I don't like others making up my mind for me, and I can't see game play by consent being a good thing!

With dedicated servers we can scan a favourite list, jump into a server with a few friendly faces, and just PLAY.

PS: One reason I haven't touched L4D in so long is cause my 'server list' thing broke. Simply put it can no longer detect games in progress, returning with 'no games' every time. Yes yes, I know of openserverbrowser but if using console controls to find a server is signs of things to come then I vote we kill anyone who says 'dedicated gaming servers are a bad idea.'

 

[MR T3D]

dedicated servers are simply better than playing hosts for the sake of other clients, and are a better for everyone.

It gets even more complicated than that. There's plenty of factors that come into play that ensures perfect latency. And on average it's hard to encounter a game consisting of six or more people while having the gameplay remain constant.

i've played consistent 40+ player servers on PC, the servers: dedicated!
having a machine w/better net connection that's neutral, focused only on processing what's going on, who's being shot, not the art and pretty physics.

 

[Paragon Fury]

snip

I don't want to be labeled a dick, but do you have ANY idea how IGNORANT this is???

Reasearch the stuff you post before you post it!!

More reliable? Fair? Let me tell you something. I own an xbox 360. I had an xbox before that. I was a hardcore gamer on it for 4 long years. I waited at midnight events for Halo 3, CoD 4, and more. Then I decided to invest in a good PC rig, and now my Xbox is collecting dust.

Let me correct you on some of your points your obviously ignorant on.

Servers a glorious thing. Once you have one in your favorites list, double click it, wait a second or two and you're in. Also it never goes down. Also people you like and know will always be on it, so you don't have to worry about getting them down on your friends list the second you think their alright.

Second, it is NOT fair. I can't tell you how many times I have ran into former 4-star generals in Halo 3 who were boosting their buddies, and simply kicked the shit out of us in gametypes like Team Slayer and Team Snipers.

Third, it is NOT more reliable. If the host's roommate decides to start watching a youtube video while he hosts a game, EVERYONE'S ping will suffer. Dedicated servers don't have this shit.

Self-regulating is beyond retarded. PC DOES HAVE THAT. VAC can BAN you from the game. YOU CAN'T PLAY IT AGAIN. Admins can IP ban you, now you're someone else s problem. You keep hacking, every server from here to Tijuana has banned you, you got no reason to play now.

Easier... don't make me laugh. I can't tell you how many times I've played CoD 4 with my buddies and had MAJOR issues with a party system... "Hey Jose you in yet?" "Yeah... but where are you?" "I'm right here man, you're not in?" "God damn this is so aggravating.

Player control: Yeah they give you that basic ability to control... but it is MINUSCULE compared to what you can do on the PC. You want knives only? Bingo. You want AIRSTRIKES ONLY?? BINGO. With the console it's basically spawn time, and round limit. How fun.

So before you go on mouthing off on PC gamers about why we are complaining, LOOK INTO IT. All you do in your post is make yourself look like a presumptions idiot who doesn't know why we are so angry over this.

Anectdotal evidence is not an acceptable defense anywhere, for anything. If you're going to try, at least try it the right way.

1: Favorites lists are an issue of personal prefence and opinion, and as such are not the point or a desired feature when trying to design something that is fair and balanced. In addition, your favorites list exists as yuor friends list and preferred gametype in MM systems.

2: Pure anectodotal evidence, and as such, has no relevance. In addition, it is faulty in its assumpitions that this will happen frequently, or enough to actual cause an issue in MM, whereas in servers it is a very real and common issue.

3: It mainly affects your connection, and even so, it is a personal issue, not a public one. Should everyone be forced to have to deal with the issues surrounding servers because you won't tell your roommate to not use bandwith hoggers while you play games?

4: Servers still require more player regulation and imput, and server systems are far more vulnerable to different kinds of hacking issues than MM systems are.

5: Again, aneticdotal evidence. Millions of people everyday go through it with little to no issues, and you've assumed first it is an issue with the system, rather than something with you or your setup.

6: Private matches have the same level of control as their server counterparts, since player control relies on the game itself, not the room method. And mods are not a card you want to play in the defense of the server system or PCs, because they are a paper thin, easily surmounted arguement, based on math alone.

You won't accept anecdotal evidence?

What the Fu-

Do you think there is a textbook on this somewhere?!?!??? What the hell else is there other than personal experience which is exactly what this is.

I vouch that every single thing turtleboy said is true and almost every point of your post was utter BS, and this is coming from my first hand experience with PC server gaming. Dudeakoff has also called out your BS, how's that for anecdotal evidence?

Seriously, what the HELL is your experience with PC gaming on dedicated servers?

I don't think you have a clue what you are talking about in terms of PC Server gaming.

If you couldn't tell, I do play quite a fair bit of PC games myself. If you really must know my history, I'll give you my recent one.


Battlefield 2 and all its expansions
Battlefield 2142 and Northern Strike
FEAR(PC and 360)
FEAR 2(PC and 360)
GRAW 2 (PC and 360)
RSV2 (PC and 360)
Team Fortress 2 (PC and 360)
CounterStrike: Source
America's Army 1,2,3
World in Conflict + Soviet Assualt
Farcry 2
Killing Floor

And I cannot sit here and tell you that any of these would not have been better off with a MM system.


And dedicated servers do not get rid of host advantage - those closest to the server still get a boon. And many of the above points are still thinking from a self-centered PoV - you're still thinking about the game from what you want, not what everyone else might like or need.


Further, at least two of you have insinuate that two of the drawbacks of dedicated servers - cost and required knowledge - are somehow benefitial. How did making something less user-friendly and more costly make it better when it doesn't provide a significant advantage over the other system?

 

[shadow skill]

snip

I don't want to be labeled a dick, but do you have ANY idea how IGNORANT this is???

Reasearch the stuff you post before you post it!!

More reliable? Fair? Let me tell you something. I own an xbox 360. I had an xbox before that. I was a hardcore gamer on it for 4 long years. I waited at midnight events for Halo 3, CoD 4, and more. Then I decided to invest in a good PC rig, and now my Xbox is collecting dust.

Let me correct you on some of your points your obviously ignorant on.

Servers a glorious thing. Once you have one in your favorites list, double click it, wait a second or two and you're in. Also it never goes down. Also people you like and know will always be on it, so you don't have to worry about getting them down on your friends list the second you think their alright.

Second, it is NOT fair. I can't tell you how many times I have ran into former 4-star generals in Halo 3 who were boosting their buddies, and simply kicked the shit out of us in gametypes like Team Slayer and Team Snipers.

Third, it is NOT more reliable. If the host's roommate decides to start watching a youtube video while he hosts a game, EVERYONE'S ping will suffer. Dedicated servers don't have this shit.

Self-regulating is beyond retarded. PC DOES HAVE THAT. VAC can BAN you from the game. YOU CAN'T PLAY IT AGAIN. Admins can IP ban you, now you're someone else s problem. You keep hacking, every server from here to Tijuana has banned you, you got no reason to play now.

Easier... don't make me laugh. I can't tell you how many times I've played CoD 4 with my buddies and had MAJOR issues with a party system... "Hey Jose you in yet?" "Yeah... but where are you?" "I'm right here man, you're not in?" "God damn this is so aggravating.

Player control: Yeah they give you that basic ability to control... but it is MINUSCULE compared to what you can do on the PC. You want knives only? Bingo. You want AIRSTRIKES ONLY?? BINGO. With the console it's basically spawn time, and round limit. How fun.

So before you go on mouthing off on PC gamers about why we are complaining, LOOK INTO IT. All you do in your post is make yourself look like a presumptions idiot who doesn't know why we are so angry over this.

Anectdotal evidence is not an acceptable defense anywhere, for anything. If you're going to try, at least try it the right way.

1: Favorites lists are an issue of personal prefence and opinion, and as such are not the point or a desired feature when trying to design something that is fair and balanced. In addition, your favorites list exists as yuor friends list and preferred gametype in MM systems.

2: Pure anectodotal evidence, and as such, has no relevance. In addition, it is faulty in its assumpitions that this will happen frequently, or enough to actual cause an issue in MM, whereas in servers it is a very real and common issue.

3: It mainly affects your connection, and even so, it is a personal issue, not a public one. Should everyone be forced to have to deal with the issues surrounding servers because you won't tell your roommate to not use bandwith hoggers while you play games?

4: Servers still require more player regulation and imput, and server systems are far more vulnerable to different kinds of hacking issues than MM systems are.

5: Again, aneticdotal evidence. Millions of people everyday go through it with little to no issues, and you've assumed first it is an issue with the system, rather than something with you or your setup.

6: Private matches have the same level of control as their server counterparts, since player control relies on the game itself, not the room method. And mods are not a card you want to play in the defense of the server system or PCs, because they are a paper thin, easily surmounted arguement, based on math alone.

You won't accept anecdotal evidence?

What the Fu-

Do you think there is a textbook on this somewhere?!?!??? What the hell else is there other than personal experience which is exactly what this is.

I vouch that every single thing turtleboy said is true and almost every point of your post was utter BS, and this is coming from my first hand experience with PC server gaming. Dudeakoff has also called out your BS, how's that for anecdotal evidence?

Seriously, what the HELL is your experience with PC gaming on dedicated servers?

I don't think you have a clue what you are talking about in terms of PC Server gaming.

If you couldn't tell, I do play quite a fair bit of PC games myself. If you really must know my history, I'll give you my recent one.


Battlefield 2 and all its expansions
Battlefield 2142 and Northern Strike
FEAR(PC and 360)
FEAR 2(PC and 360)
GRAW 2 (PC and 360)
RSV2 (PC and 360)
Team Fortress 2 (PC and 360)
CounterStrike: Source
America's Army 1,2,3
World in Conflict + Soviet Assualt
Farcry 2
Killing Floor

And I cannot sit here and tell you that any of these would not have been better off with a MM system.


And dedicated servers do not get rid of host advantage - those closest to the server still get a boon. And many of the above points are still thinking from a self-centered PoV - you're still thinking about the game from what you want, not what everyone else might like or need.


Further, at least two of you have insinuate that two of the drawbacks of dedicated servers - cost and required knowledge - are somehow benefitial. How did making something less user-friendly and more costly make it better when it doesn't provide a significant advantage over the other system?

What the hell is the point of this? Why can't they have both? How would having both not satisfy everyone and solve the problem permanently? If you argue that there should ONLY be MM that isn't a selfless point of view. MM just gives you a game experience with higher latency and you still have the "problem" of where players are located. As for not having a significant advantage over MM, you ever wonder how games like Resistance achieve as many as 60 players? If you guessed dedicated servers you guessed right.

Ps. Lots of private dedicated servers are rented by gamers through hosting companies. The maker of the game is not necessarily the one paying for all the servers that will be used.

 

[slopeslider]

snip

I don't want to be labeled a dick, but do you have ANY idea how IGNORANT this is???

Reasearch the stuff you post before you post it!!

More reliable? Fair? Let me tell you something. I own an xbox 360. I had an xbox before that. I was a hardcore gamer on it for 4 long years. I waited at midnight events for Halo 3, CoD 4, and more. Then I decided to invest in a good PC rig, and now my Xbox is collecting dust.

Let me correct you on some of your points your obviously ignorant on.

Servers a glorious thing. Once you have one in your favorites list, double click it, wait a second or two and you're in. Also it never goes down. Also people you like and know will always be on it, so you don't have to worry about getting them down on your friends list the second you think their alright.

Second, it is NOT fair. I can't tell you how many times I have ran into former 4-star generals in Halo 3 who were boosting their buddies, and simply kicked the shit out of us in gametypes like Team Slayer and Team Snipers.

Third, it is NOT more reliable. If the host's roommate decides to start watching a youtube video while he hosts a game, EVERYONE'S ping will suffer. Dedicated servers don't have this shit.

Self-regulating is beyond retarded. PC DOES HAVE THAT. VAC can BAN you from the game. YOU CAN'T PLAY IT AGAIN. Admins can IP ban you, now you're someone else s problem. You keep hacking, every server from here to Tijuana has banned you, you got no reason to play now.

Easier... don't make me laugh. I can't tell you how many times I've played CoD 4 with my buddies and had MAJOR issues with a party system... "Hey Jose you in yet?" "Yeah... but where are you?" "I'm right here man, you're not in?" "God damn this is so aggravating.

Player control: Yeah they give you that basic ability to control... but it is MINUSCULE compared to what you can do on the PC. You want knives only? Bingo. You want AIRSTRIKES ONLY?? BINGO. With the console it's basically spawn time, and round limit. How fun.

So before you go on mouthing off on PC gamers about why we are complaining, LOOK INTO IT. All you do in your post is make yourself look like a presumptions idiot who doesn't know why we are so angry over this.

Anectdotal evidence is not an acceptable defense anywhere, for anything. If you're going to try, at least try it the right way.

1: Favorites lists are an issue of personal prefence and opinion, and as such are not the point or a desired feature when trying to design something that is fair and balanced. In addition, your favorites list exists as yuor friends list and preferred gametype in MM systems.

2: Pure anectodotal evidence, and as such, has no relevance. In addition, it is faulty in its assumpitions that this will happen frequently, or enough to actual cause an issue in MM, whereas in servers it is a very real and common issue.

3: It mainly affects your connection, and even so, it is a personal issue, not a public one. Should everyone be forced to have to deal with the issues surrounding servers because you won't tell your roommate to not use bandwith hoggers while you play games?

4: Servers still require more player regulation and imput, and server systems are far more vulnerable to different kinds of hacking issues than MM systems are.

5: Again, aneticdotal evidence. Millions of people everyday go through it with little to no issues, and you've assumed first it is an issue with the system, rather than something with you or your setup.

6: Private matches have the same level of control as their server counterparts, since player control relies on the game itself, not the room method. And mods are not a card you want to play in the defense of the server system or PCs, because they are a paper thin, easily surmounted arguement, based on math alone.

You won't accept anecdotal evidence?

What the Fu-

Do you think there is a textbook on this somewhere?!?!??? What the hell else is there other than personal experience which is exactly what this is.

I vouch that every single thing turtleboy said is true and almost every point of your post was utter BS, and this is coming from my first hand experience with PC server gaming. Dudeakoff has also called out your BS, how's that for anecdotal evidence?

Seriously, what the HELL is your experience with PC gaming on dedicated servers?

I don't think you have a clue what you are talking about in terms of PC Server gaming.

If you couldn't tell, I do play quite a fair bit of PC games myself. If you really must know my history, I'll give you my recent one.


Battlefield 2 and all its expansions
Battlefield 2142 and Northern Strike
FEAR(PC and 360)
FEAR 2(PC and 360)
GRAW 2 (PC and 360)
RSV2 (PC and 360)
Team Fortress 2 (PC and 360)
CounterStrike: Source
America's Army 1,2,3
World in Conflict + Soviet Assualt
Farcry 2
Killing Floor

And I cannot sit here and tell you that any of these would not have been better off with a MM system.


And dedicated servers do not get rid of host advantage - those closest to the server still get a boon. And many of the above points are still thinking from a self-centered PoV - you're still thinking about the game from what you want, not what everyone else might like or need.


Further, at least two of you have insinuate that two of the drawbacks of dedicated servers - cost and required knowledge - are somehow benefitial. How did making something less user-friendly and more costly make it better when it doesn't provide a significant advantage over the other system?

You can argue back and forth all day, but in the end the PC users want both while you see fit to force your MM on everyone as the ONLY way. You say that the games you listed would've been better with MM, so Im sure you know what it feels like to be forced to play one way. Im all for you being able to have MM, and pc users have dedicated servers, but you seem to be ok in forcing others to submit to your ideas. Having been forced to play on dedicated when you'd rather do MM, I would have guessed you'd know it's never fun to be forced into something you dont like, yet your fine with screwing over the others because MM is suprerior according to you?

Im but a humble 360 user. I dont play pc games online, I haven't the rig for that,though I understand how they're run. What we're trying to say is why cant pc users have both? You'd have matchmaking, they'd have dedi-servs, and everyone could enjoy the game the way they wanted to. I dont think ANYONE here arguing against you wants you to be forced into playing dedi-servs if you dont want to, they just want to keep what's already been a long established thing in pc gaming along with the new MM options.
It's like if they made a really cool and useful hybrid car. most advanced ever. I'd support it, even buy it. But to then immediatly ban all traditional combustion-engine vehicles because 'hybrids are better' wouldn't fly with the owners at stake. In this example you'd be the guy who's advocated for hybrids since the 90's, and the other pc users would be the traditional vehicle owners. You welcome and support it, but they have a stake in this as well and dont want to immediately lose what they have used for many years.

So to finish, although I dont play pc games, I00% sympathize with those who wish to have both rather than those who'd force one way onto everyone else. So with your previous posts, were you simply advocating MM as something other than a useless mode, ore were you really suggesting that it be forced onto those who dont want it? If this was the opposite way, and MM was being replaced by dedi-servs, would you advocate for MM only or to have both?

 

[Treblaine]

You won't accept anecdotal evidence?

What the Fu-

Do you think there is a textbook on this somewhere?!?!??? What the hell else is there other than personal experience which is exactly what this is.

I vouch that every single thing turtleboy said is true and almost every point of your post was utter BS, and this is coming from my first hand experience with PC server gaming. Dudeakoff has also called out your BS, how's that for anecdotal evidence?

Seriously, what the HELL is your experience with PC gaming on dedicated servers?

I don't think you have a clue what you are talking about in terms of PC Server gaming.

If you couldn't tell, I do play quite a fair bit of PC games myself. If you really must know my history, I'll give you my recent one.


Battlefield 2 and all its expansions
Battlefield 2142 and Northern Strike
FEAR(PC and 360)
FEAR 2(PC and 360)
GRAW 2 (PC and 360)
RSV2 (PC and 360)
Team Fortress 2 (PC and 360)
CounterStrike: Source
America's Army 1,2,3
World in Conflict + Soviet Assualt
Farcry 2
Killing Floor

And I cannot sit here and tell you that any of these would not have been better off with a MM system.


And dedicated servers do not get rid of host advantage - those closest to the server still get a boon. And many of the above points are still thinking from a self-centered PoV - you're still thinking about the game from what you want, not what everyone else might like or need.


Further, at least two of you have insinuate that two of the drawbacks of dedicated servers - cost and required knowledge - are somehow benefitial. How did making something less user-friendly and more costly make it better when it doesn't provide a significant advantage over the other system?

"I cannot sit here and tell you that any of these would not have been better off with a MM system."

Wow, a double negative. That statement basically means nothing now.

"dedicated servers do not get rid of host advantage"

Yes they DO, because there IS NO HOST. Some player will always have some slight advantage over another but hey, you know what, if you DON'T use MM and can select the server from a list you can make the CHOICE yourself on which server is good for you in terms of your own lag and the lag of other players.

Bottom line: Dedicated servers will always be MORE fair or fairer than MM.

Then you make a song and dance about "insinuations" as if that is the crux of the whole argument drawing more wild conclusions for more ridiculous straw man arguments.

 

[shadow skill]

snip

I don't want to be labeled a dick, but do you have ANY idea how IGNORANT this is???

Reasearch the stuff you post before you post it!!

More reliable? Fair? Let me tell you something. I own an xbox 360. I had an xbox before that. I was a hardcore gamer on it for 4 long years. I waited at midnight events for Halo 3, CoD 4, and more. Then I decided to invest in a good PC rig, and now my Xbox is collecting dust.

Let me correct you on some of your points your obviously ignorant on.

Servers a glorious thing. Once you have one in your favorites list, double click it, wait a second or two and you're in. Also it never goes down. Also people you like and know will always be on it, so you don't have to worry about getting them down on your friends list the second you think their alright.

Second, it is NOT fair. I can't tell you how many times I have ran into former 4-star generals in Halo 3 who were boosting their buddies, and simply kicked the shit out of us in gametypes like Team Slayer and Team Snipers.

Third, it is NOT more reliable. If the host's roommate decides to start watching a youtube video while he hosts a game, EVERYONE'S ping will suffer. Dedicated servers don't have this shit.

Self-regulating is beyond retarded. PC DOES HAVE THAT. VAC can BAN you from the game. YOU CAN'T PLAY IT AGAIN. Admins can IP ban you, now you're someone else s problem. You keep hacking, every server from here to Tijuana has banned you, you got no reason to play now.

Easier... don't make me laugh. I can't tell you how many times I've played CoD 4 with my buddies and had MAJOR issues with a party system... "Hey Jose you in yet?" "Yeah... but where are you?" "I'm right here man, you're not in?" "God damn this is so aggravating.

Player control: Yeah they give you that basic ability to control... but it is MINUSCULE compared to what you can do on the PC. You want knives only? Bingo. You want AIRSTRIKES ONLY?? BINGO. With the console it's basically spawn time, and round limit. How fun.

So before you go on mouthing off on PC gamers about why we are complaining, LOOK INTO IT. All you do in your post is make yourself look like a presumptions idiot who doesn't know why we are so angry over this.

Anectdotal evidence is not an acceptable defense anywhere, for anything. If you're going to try, at least try it the right way.

1: Favorites lists are an issue of personal prefence and opinion, and as such are not the point or a desired feature when trying to design something that is fair and balanced. In addition, your favorites list exists as yuor friends list and preferred gametype in MM systems.

2: Pure anectodotal evidence, and as such, has no relevance. In addition, it is faulty in its assumpitions that this will happen frequently, or enough to actual cause an issue in MM, whereas in servers it is a very real and common issue.

3: It mainly affects your connection, and even so, it is a personal issue, not a public one. Should everyone be forced to have to deal with the issues surrounding servers because you won't tell your roommate to not use bandwith hoggers while you play games?

4: Servers still require more player regulation and imput, and server systems are far more vulnerable to different kinds of hacking issues than MM systems are.

5: Again, aneticdotal evidence. Millions of people everyday go through it with little to no issues, and you've assumed first it is an issue with the system, rather than something with you or your setup.

6: Private matches have the same level of control as their server counterparts, since player control relies on the game itself, not the room method. And mods are not a card you want to play in the defense of the server system or PCs, because they are a paper thin, easily surmounted arguement, based on math alone.

You won't accept anecdotal evidence?

What the Fu-

Do you think there is a textbook on this somewhere?!?!??? What the hell else is there other than personal experience which is exactly what this is.

I vouch that every single thing turtleboy said is true and almost every point of your post was utter BS, and this is coming from my first hand experience with PC server gaming. Dudeakoff has also called out your BS, how's that for anecdotal evidence?

Seriously, what the HELL is your experience with PC gaming on dedicated servers?

I don't think you have a clue what you are talking about in terms of PC Server gaming.

If you couldn't tell, I do play quite a fair bit of PC games myself. If you really must know my history, I'll give you my recent one.


Battlefield 2 and all its expansions
Battlefield 2142 and Northern Strike
FEAR(PC and 360)
FEAR 2(PC and 360)
GRAW 2 (PC and 360)
RSV2 (PC and 360)
Team Fortress 2 (PC and 360)
CounterStrike: Source
America's Army 1,2,3
World in Conflict + Soviet Assualt
Farcry 2
Killing Floor

And I cannot sit here and tell you that any of these would not have been better off with a MM system.


And dedicated servers do not get rid of host advantage - those closest to the server still get a boon. And many of the above points are still thinking from a self-centered PoV - you're still thinking about the game from what you want, not what everyone else might like or need.


Further, at least two of you have insinuate that two of the drawbacks of dedicated servers - cost and required knowledge - are somehow benefitial. How did making something less user-friendly and more costly make it better when it doesn't provide a significant advantage over the other system?

You can argue back and forth all day, but in the end the PC users want both while you see fit to force your MM on everyone as the ONLY way. You say that the games you listed would've been better with MM, so Im sure you know what it feels like to be forced to play one way. Im all for you being able to have MM, and pc users have dedicated servers, but you seem to be ok in forcing others to submit to your ideas. Having been forced to play on dedicated when you'd rather do MM, I would have guessed you'd know it's never fun to be forced into something you dont like, yet your fine with screwing over the others because MM is suprerior according to you?

Im but a humble 360 user. I dont play pc games online, I haven't the rig for that,though I understand how they're run. What we're trying to say is why cant pc users have both? You'd have matchmaking, they'd have dedi-servs, and everyone could enjoy the game the way they wanted to. I dont think ANYONE here arguing against you wants you to be forced into playing dedi-servs if you dont want to, they just want to keep what's already been a long established thing in pc gaming along with the new MM options.
It's like if they made a really cool and useful hybrid car. most advanced ever. I'd support it, even buy it. But to then immediatly ban all traditional combustion-engine vehicles because 'hybrids are better' wouldn't fly with the owners at stake. In this example you'd be the guy who's advocated for hybrids since the 90's, and the other pc users would be the traditional vehicle owners. You welcome and support it, but they have a stake in this as well and dont want to immediately lose what they have used for many years.

So to finish, although I dont play pc games, I00% sympathize with those who wish to have both rather than those who'd force one way onto everyone else. So with your previous posts, were you simply advocating MM as something other than a useless mode, ore were you really suggesting that it be forced onto those who dont want it? If this was the opposite way, and MM was being replaced by dedi-servs, would you advocate for MM only or to have both?

The ironic thing is that even if they had private dedicated servers not controlled by the game manufacturer, you could easily have a join now button to automatically pick any open server......That is basically what MM is. You can have dedicated servers with MM, the actual issue is the lack of private servers controlled by players themselves. Not that I disagree with you in any way.

 

[4RT1LL3RY]

And dedicated servers do not get rid of host advantage - those closest to the server still get a boon. And many of the above points are still thinking from a self-centered PoV - you're still thinking about the game from what you want, not what everyone else might like or need.

So you are saying that in a universe where things can only move at the speed of light the person closest to the server has an advantage, really???
I think of it this way, you can have it where a single person is hosting from 1mb/s upload rate, they will have 0 latency(not lag) and 0 packet lose(lag) The host has a ping of 0 and has instant response. Host advantage is lessened with a dedicated server because no person has 0 ping. Yes, there is always an advantage to those never the server, people in the UK will always get a high ping.

Paragon Fury, one of the points you made that a dedicated server cost money and requires knowledge. The game developer doesn't need to do anything for either of these except provide server files. They don't need to pay for ANY game servers except for a master server that tells you what servers are available. Also for your point about what others want or need, at least 114629 people want dedicated servers. Now this is just after a single day.

The advantage of a dedicated server to a P2P system is, consistent latency, higher uptime, greater customization, and having a point of reference for if a person wants to come back. The cons of a dedicated server are, it requires dedicated hardware, which costs money, a connection with a large enough connect, which costs money, and allows individuals to control other peoples experience.

The P2P has the advantage of being able to run on any players system, no cost to anyone, and ...(please someone tell me another benefit) The cons of it are it is limits hosting to people with good connections(for a good experience), has uncertain amounts of uptime, limited number of players, preset gamemodes only, and cannot be returned to unless the same host is on.

I think it is a classic question of quantity vs quality. A dedicated server system will tend to have larger amount of quality servers with higher levels of players, lower ping etc. A P2P system can have many more rooms and matches at once in the system, but the experience will be more varied for people based on their location and connection quality. On a good dedicated server in Australia I can get a ping of 75 from the midwest of the US in TF2 on a 24 person server. On my same connection playing Halo 3 with some Aussies I am in the red in a 16 player match of big team battle.

Its not hard for a person to host their own server in any valve game, you click a few options and your done and have a listen server that can handle 12 people just fine. I can setup a GMod server for Sandbox, on gm_construct, for 8 players, with default amounts of props, and a password in less then 10 clicks of my mouse, I do believe it is quite simple. It does exactly what iwnet does, but you can actually have some control over it.

 

[ButanicXpandA]

As long as the PC version differs from the console version (for the better) ill be happy, after all it costs alot to build a decent gaming computer, the loss of dedicated servers means PC gaming will assimilate into console online play, so in a way it defeats the purpose of owning a gaming computer.... in a way.

 

[Mcface]

why not both?

Allow a server list, or matching making.

Rainbow Six Vegas has both.

 

[4RT1LL3RY]

I will accept matchmaking if it lets me fight against people on consoles. If we are expected to use a console system they should go all the way and allow those on PC to "play" those on 360 and/or PS3. They always say that a controller is just as good as a keyboard and mouse, time to see if what they say is true. I would like cross-platform play, especially if it were to allow people on console to play on a dedicated server, and done well unlike Shadowrun. I would love to frag a bit with my console only friends.

 

[rapidoud]

Well if companies listened to gamers all the time then all games would be 100% off, come out in australia SAME TIME AS EVERYONE ELSE and the whole world would supply them with anything they want. But that isn't gonna happen, as people are selfish, people don't know what they want, and a company apparently can't do what it wants without the media brigade going WHY WHY WHY ANSWERS NAO NAO NAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please close the thread, no one cares for the story, why can't a company make decisions on it's own with people crying about it.

 

[sneakypenguin]

Can someone explain to me why you need dedicated servers again ?! Your getting the same damn thing with a MM p2p system. You can do private lobbys if you wanna do a no grenades match or whatever, you have your friends list for clans and such, your getting the benefits of iw.net and who knows what else.

I fail to see how private lobby differs too much from dedicated servers... Private lobby you control game settings, host can boot, same as a server. Surely someone has a connection faster than DSL lite so lag shouldnt be an issue. Heck I play with japanese ppl in the early am hours in America no lag. So again whats the big issue?