Em I'm sorry what is the good with this change dedicated servers are far far superior to P2P.Frank_Sinatra_ said:
OT: I think this is a shit move and I hope this trend is stopped quickly as dedicated servers are much better than P2P.
John Carmack Says No Dedicated Servers for Rage
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
OT: I think this is a shit move and I hope this trend is stopped quickly as dedicated servers are much better than P2P.
I want to see the outrage over the latency issues that will arise when this form of online play is implemented on the PC.
But really as Shamus Young expressed about Online activation [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/experienced-points/6452-Experienced-Points-Online-Activation-Is-a-Ripoff] applies to the whole debate about dedicated servers. Just remember that many years down the line when the company decides to take the servers down, your game will officially NOT have a multiplayer element.
plus i dont see how the development team cant make money off of Dedicated servers. i mean by doing this they are gonna have to fork the bill for servers to run the match making service. And if you want to get rid of the lag your gonna have to host servers too. So why cant they just rent these servers out to ppl willing to pay for it? I mean holy crap the Dedicated server market is huge.
But really as Shamus Young expressed about Online activation [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/experienced-points/6452-Experienced-Points-Online-Activation-Is-a-Ripoff] applies to the whole debate about dedicated servers. Just remember that many years down the line when the company decides to take the servers down, your game will officially NOT have a multiplayer element.
plus i dont see how the development team cant make money off of Dedicated servers. i mean by doing this they are gonna have to fork the bill for servers to run the match making service. And if you want to get rid of the lag your gonna have to host servers too. So why cant they just rent these servers out to ppl willing to pay for it? I mean holy crap the Dedicated server market is huge.
The Fail that undoes 15 years of Win.
I won't get angry, but if Carmack starts whining like a ***** that a cracked version of Rage that supports dedicated servers is being widely used... well then I hope he gets a compound fracture in his arm so he can never use mouse aim again.
i.e. dedicated server = round wheel,
It's old, it works, only an IDIOT would release a car with square wheels, just like a PC game without dedicated server support.
I won't get angry, but if Carmack starts whining like a ***** that a cracked version of Rage that supports dedicated servers is being widely used... well then I hope he gets a compound fracture in his arm so he can never use mouse aim again.
No, it's more like saying that square wheels don't bloody well work, we should have kept them round.Malygris said:
i.e. dedicated server = round wheel,
It's old, it works, only an IDIOT would release a car with square wheels, just like a PC game without dedicated server support.
It's not about the ping or the feasibility of p2p hosting, they'll figure it out, eventually. The lack of dedicated servers affects gamers in another major aspect, the servers were *a place* to go. You ran into the same bunch of people and ended up befriending them, eventually forming a community.
There was no use for social network styled interfaces, you went someplace and had some fun, people who rented those servers tried to shape them into their ideal gaming environment, some ended up being known as friendly places, others for being on the hardcore end of the scale.
I fail to see the point of being randomly matched to some bloke i'll never see again. If you're not part of a community already, how exactly will you be able to start or join one? They'll likely throw in some social network crap to compensate for the lack of interaction between the players they caused in the first place by ditching dedicated servers.
It sounds quite like closing down all the pubs, while still selling beer to people and telling them "you and the last ten lads who got themselves a beer will go to this random fellow's place, and he'll throw you out when your done with your pint".
tl;dr : Retarded move, let's hope he changes his mind.
There was no use for social network styled interfaces, you went someplace and had some fun, people who rented those servers tried to shape them into their ideal gaming environment, some ended up being known as friendly places, others for being on the hardcore end of the scale.
I fail to see the point of being randomly matched to some bloke i'll never see again. If you're not part of a community already, how exactly will you be able to start or join one? They'll likely throw in some social network crap to compensate for the lack of interaction between the players they caused in the first place by ditching dedicated servers.
It sounds quite like closing down all the pubs, while still selling beer to people and telling them "you and the last ten lads who got themselves a beer will go to this random fellow's place, and he'll throw you out when your done with your pint".
tl;dr : Retarded move, let's hope he changes his mind.
This absolutely pisses me off! I guess it could be worse, I figure if anyone can program a good peer-to-peer gaming network structure it'd be Carmack, but sometimes there's things that are just so good, that have a culture about them already, that you don't want to see them go. Why do we have to forsake dedicated server gaming just to see where matchmaking takes us? Why not offer both? Why? WHY DAMMIT WHY??? I SPENT TOO MANY YEARS PLAYING COUNTER-STRIKE AND QUAKE III TO RELEARN NOW!!
Steelfists said:
Because frankly, PC games aren't as relevant as they were back then.AndresCL said:
The man is staggeringly smart, and I'd wager good money that he's still in the highest echelons of people who understand the PC as a gaming platform and what it can do.
It seems Infinity Ward's attempt at a big change is starting to snowball, and id is a lot of snow gathered, and there might be a few others jumping on.
However at this point, it can only be an experiment. We'll probably go through a phase where people either grit their teeth without servers, or not touch the multiplayer.
However at this point, it can only be an experiment. We'll probably go through a phase where people either grit their teeth without servers, or not touch the multiplayer.
And this has absolutely nothing to with being purchased by zenimax...
"Carmack says" my ass, this should be "publisher screws over loyal fans to save a tiny amount of money on a product meant for the lowest common denominator that would buy a bag of manure if it hat 'GOTY for X360" written on it in crayon"
"Carmack says" my ass, this should be "publisher screws over loyal fans to save a tiny amount of money on a product meant for the lowest common denominator that would buy a bag of manure if it hat 'GOTY for X360" written on it in crayon"
Wow this MW2 thing really is the beginning of the end. This dedicated server genocide is spreading. Who will it be next I wonder?
He had made some godlike additions to the genre, but his work since 2000 has been less and less inspiring. Doom 3 was stupidly hung up on 'atmosphere', Quake 4 was bargain bin, even Quake 3 wasn't great.(The engine was good but most people cut it right down to basic graphics just to get as much speed out of it as possible).CantFaketheFunk said:
Doom RPG was a sideways move that he re-used, and the new Wolfenstein may be nice with the piff gun, but the multiplayer took a hammering; exactly what he's talking about here.
The only explanation I can think of is that they're trying to cut down on cheating/pirating; but without the modders, I predict a very fast demise for people playing it. Especially as Carmack hasn't given a reason for doing it. Even something as simple as "We want to stop pirates" might give him some support; but...even luminaries like Tim Schafer can make mistakes.
It's a very odd and sad announcement, and I'd really like to know why he said it, especially to Variety. Killing off one of the few things that make the PC unique amongst gaming platforms is like bringing out Wii games that don't use the wiimote. Unless you're going to innovate...
What appears to be happening is they're cutting down choice to increase ease of use; and that goes counter to most PC gamers wishes - we're willing to put up with hideous front-ends just to lay our own mark on it. That's how Carmack started, and seeing him turn his back on where he came from is very disheartening.
Yes, but they're alienating the PC market this way, not stimulating interest in it. Seems counter productive to me.Virgil said:
No, because I have not seen a game with the true old style dedicated server, as in the server is run as a separate program outside of the game, in a long time. Dedicated servers of today are still run through the game and can still be seen in every player's server list, but the creator of the server has total control and it is based on their version of the game. Modern dedicated servers still require game authentication because they are run through the dev servers just like every other mp match. Nothing is gained by eliminating this option.oppp7 said:
With all due respect, John Carmack was a groundbreaking genius 19 years ago when he single handedly caused ID to spearhead the 3D movement. Since the release of Quake 3 arena, in 2000 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Id_software#Games] ID has released nothing but uninspired rehashes of old IPs. In fact, Rage seems to be the only new IP ID has ever worked on SINCE FUCKING QUAKE IN 1996!Malygris said:
That said, I'll maintain what I said with MWII. This isn't about making it easier on the customer, it's about conning the players out of as much control as they possibly can. If these companies could have it as they wish, you'd have to fork over for some "DLC" if you even wanted to change your avatar. Companies have become shortsighted. Blinded by instant profit.