|
We’ve been quietly watching the debate about dedicated servers for Modern Warfare 2 unfold, and listening to opinions from all sides, but last night we found overselves on the front lines of the issue when our PC review of the game was called into question. One of our readers, known simply as Kurt, has some very strong feelings about both the review and the game itself, so we felt that in keeping with our standards, it only fair that we reprint them here with his permission.
In response to Kurt’s initial accusations, the fact that our reviewers are not compensated by a title’s stakeholders was reiterated, and the reason for our brief format was explained. “Please keep in mind that the brevity of our reviews [is] meant to be conducive to discussions with our readers,” remarked Avault founder Angel Munoz. Kurt was then invited to share with us his views on specifically why he feels that the game’s Multiplayer is broken.
 Kurt feels that “in almost every single way, MW2 multiplayer is a step BACKWARDS in regards to CoD4.” As for specific complaints, his first issue is with Modern Warfare 2’s apparent lack of community. “In CoD4, there was a large multiplayer community. You could visit the same server day in and day out and talk with and play with the same people. That’s gotten a lot more difficult now.”
His main issue, however, is with the potential for lag. “IWNet uses a P2P framework which means I’m going to be using the bandwidth of the person hosting the game. One of the largest disadvantages to using the P2P infrastructure that IWNet provides is host ping advantage. The host of the game will have no latency (since it’s being hosted on his computer), which gives him a huge reactionary advantage in game play. Since we are forced to use IWNet’s P2P connection, there are no dedicated servers available which means we can no longer pick a low ping server to play on in order to assure a fast and responsive gaming experience. Now we just have to roll the dice and hope it works out. You better hope the person hosting the game doesn’t drop connection, cause then you’ll have to wait 10-15 seconds (if you’re lucky) for IWNet to pick another host.”
 Additionally, Kurt brought up several gameplay aspects that he believes warrant a mention. “There is no console either, so if you would like to turn off or on certain aspects of the game to improve frame rate or game play…No lean is included in MW2 either which means there’s a whole lot of running around corners and instantly dying because you can’t peer around before running. You used to be able to play with 64 players in CoD4 which had the potential of being a huge deal of fun. Guns blazing and players running everywhere killing each other. Now we’re limited to 9v9, and that’s only in ONE multiplayer game play mode. If you want to play something other than deathmatch, you have to play with even less players.”
For $10 more than the previous title in the series, the above changes were made, and many members of the PC community are less than thrilled, but not everyone in the PC community shares Kurt’s opinion, and Michael Teplitsky was quick to respond. He began by restating that he has not yet experienced any lag issues, and hypothesized that the reported issues may have to do with an individual player’s connection. He also provided evidence that dedicated servers for the game do exist.
Teplitsky then went on to address the game’s lack of inclusion of certain features. “The desirability of various mutators, crazy game settings, player-made maps, etc. is entirely subjective. The reason to play a game is not a laundry list of features, but rather the amount of fun that it is providing. Personally I find MW2 multiplayer to have a higher entertainment value that MW or the likes of Unreal Tournament, where the players are in complete control. It appears that my bias is supported by empirical evidence, if the sales figures mean anything…The idea that a match with 64 players is somehow *better* than a match with 18 players is simply ludicrous.”
But what about the chart, doesn’t it show how Modern Warfare 2 just doesn’t match up to its predecessors? According to Teplitsky, “it is an opinion of a community of modders, who are as biased as they are angry. This is quite understandable, since their bread and butter were taken away from them in the name of improving game experience for others. Still, as vocal as they can be, they are a small minority that is acting out purely due to self-interest. Flooding metacritic and amazon with their spiteful “reviews” may be a curious instance of an online flash-mob but holds to real value or meaning.”
We now have two sides to the argument, but are there more? Did you run right out on release day and purchase the PC version, are you a PC gamer that has refused to make this purchase because of the reported server issues, or have you played the game and decided that all of the issues surrounding it are hype and nothing more? Let us know.
|
Most Popular Stories (30 days)
Most Commented Stories (30 days)
Recent Comments
This Month's Top Commenters
Some of these issues where brought up in my post on the forums dated Nov 5.
http://forums.avault.com/showthread.php?t=681&page=2
Personally, because of what i perceived as limitations in the PC version and as a person who prefers the Sniper only servers when I play MP, I have decided not to get the game. There just isn’t enough there, IMO, to warrant a $60 purchase.
Who would buy this game for PC anyway? And if they bought the game, why did they not read the back of the box where it shows how many players can play at one time? Stop crying and b****ing, don’t blame the creators for your purchase. They make the game, you bought it, it’s that simple. Stop being computer nerds and buy a Xbox or PS3!
With the game being otherwise identical, why would anyone want to play on an inferior system at a 1024×600 resolution? o.O
Well, “The man”, you certainly sum up the general mentality of console-centric gamers on this topic. We hear a lot of “stop crying” from folks who simply don’t get it.
As for “Who would buy this game for PC,” how about the thousands of people who thought the first MW was an outstanding game and were hoping for an improvement to that, or perhaps at least more of the same? Surely not all of these people have been following every detail about the game online, and many were likely surprised to learn at the kind of downgrading that has taken place.
Try to step outside yourself and your limited perspective on gaming for a moment and see it from a PC gamer’s point of view. The ever steady “dumbing down” of gaming in the name of quick and easy console money is a frustrating thing for many of us. Check out the thread Chip linked above, and join in (if you have something worthwhile to say).
Angus, “…how about the thousands of people who thought the first MW was an outstanding game and were hoping for an improvement to that…”
So you PC gamers assumed since prior games were amazing this one would be too? Just proved my statement. Who’s fault is that?…The Creators? I think not. Looking at this from a PC games point of view would leave me to the same conclusion. But hey, you don’t have to stay upset for to long now do you? You can always go back to Warcraft. Anyone reading this seen that Southpark episode? That episode sums up PC gamers. Don’t get mad at me for stating the truth, refund the game and play MW1 if you hate the new one so much.
Nevermind the people (like me) who were able to follow the details about the game and did not purchase it. I guess we don’t have a right to be upset about it either, huh? A game we were looking forward to immensely has had features stripped away and the price raised.
Please forget what I said about joining that thread. Your comment about Warcraft proves my point about your limited perspective.
Angus, I can’t believe you just responded to a troll who wore a t-shirt that said “Troll” and carried a sign with “Troll” written all over it. What’s wrong with you?
I am but a dumb fish allowing myself to be baited.
Hahaha… Someone likes Fish Sticks
i don’t understand…
so there’s no such problems for console players?
Well, gorilla, they’ve reduced the functionality of the PC version to be on par with the console version. So to console players (as exhibited in this comment thread) it is not a problem. Many of them have no concept of what Kurt’s talking about here. They’re not aware of the communities that can form around a server due to the options it’s set up to use, the server’s regular players, the moderators of the server, etc. They don’t appreciate the benefits of leaning in a shooter. Out of simple ignorance, they call PC gamers “whiners” because they have no idea what they’ve been missing. And hey, they’ve always paid $60 for games, so why shouldn’t we?
Look at the Avault Forums. Their strength is the established community. You come there knowing the environment, knowing the style of the topics, and knowing the regular posters. If IW were running the Avault Forums, you’d have to sign on to the Internet and hope one of your buddies was signed on at the same time, or prearrange a time with him. Otherwise, you’d randomly be thrown into a thread, maybe with a friend, maybe not, and hope for the best, and it would be a crap shoot to see if the topic you want to discuss is actually on the table.
It’s a poor analogy, I know. The bottom line is that IW took several steps backwards in features/functionality from Modern Warfare PC to Modern Warfare 2 PC, and then they had the gall to charge more for it.
I am a PC and a Console guy. I actually had COD4 for both the PC and the XBOX. It just happened to come with the new Video Card I got for my PC for free. Once I started playing the PC Version instead of the XBOX version online there was no comparison how much more fun it was. I’m not a modder, host a server or a clan guy. So having the community wasn’t my main interest. I’d just pick the server with the number of players I wanted, and the right ping rate, and away I went. My interest was in the maps, gameplay and especially the number of players per game. Don’t get me wrong….9v9 is fun, but 16v16 or more is just simply a blast in comparison. If I had known that the PC version was only 9v9 I would of cancelled my pre-order. Too bad Infinity Ward waited until the last couple weeks to disclose this. I suspect they did that for a reason. I’ll still play it, but I certainly won’t get the next one unless they make changes.
ah, i see! thanks for the explanation.
it’s just sad…. /_\
The Guy.. you’re an idiot, and Angus is right. You’re directly coming from a console gamer’s perspective; therefore, you do not understand this issue. This game seems great for console gamers because it is in fact dumbed down, and there are no communities like the PC version. IW and Activision made bad decisions, and many PC gamers will not go back to it.. that’s it.
P.S. Warcraft is a terrible game, and not all PC gamers play it. You’re just another ignorant console gamer, and a troll.
Bobby I think you mean “The man” not “The Guy.”
“i don’t understand…
so there’s no such problems for console players?”
That is because you console monkeys have no idea what PC gaming is about. You live in your little lounge chair world, which is all fine and good. I have my PS3, it’s cool, but it doesn’t compare to the PC for large scale gaming experience. Gaming on a PC is completely different than gaming on a Platform, it’s as simple as that. Some of us like the PC, just not nearly enough of us to matter any more.
MW2 has satisfied its target audience, the platform gamer. Whoopie! I can still be p***ed that a franchise I have supported for 10+ years abandoned me and the rest of the community who prefer an office chair to an ottaman.
Testing…
Angel, you’re absolutely correct, my bad. Thanks for the correction.
Call me dumb, an idiot, or a troll….i may in fact be a three…but at least i’m having fun with MW2 on Xbox360…hows MW2 on PC goin for ya? lol…this statement sums up why the PC version sucks…
PSB-
“Some of us like the PC, just not nearly enough of us to matter any more.”
When the PC version of a game is being out sold by the PS3 version…you know interest is gone…
You even go as far to compare the chairs we sit in…I’ll take a comfy couch over a office chair anyday…You’ll have back problems later in life…however theres one good thing going for ya…Just in case the p*** from the pepsi bottle you PC gamers usually have by your feet spills….you won’t have to worry about it getting on your couch…it’ll be near your office chair which costs so much cheaper to replace…but knowing you guys, you’ll prolly leave the p*** on the floor and tell yourselves to buy diapers so next time you can keep on playing without any interruptions…lol
Ok “The man”, have fun with terrible graphics, and a limited system. MW2 is a bad game anyways. 60 dollars for some new weapons and perks.. it’s seriously not a good game. One I am waiting for is Battlefield Bad Company 2. This game will destroy MW2.
I agree: “Warcraft 1″ was a terrible game!
World of Warcraft is an amazing game though!
Warcraft was an excellent game. And Warcraft II. Warcraft III was so-so but still kinda nice.
Post a Comment