No Dedicated Servers for Modern Warfare 2 PC, Fans Freak Out

[Paragon Fury]

well you can say goodbye to any type of competitions, playing with freinds, and any mods with keep the game alive (witch usually keeps people playing the game), im sorry but what were they thinking when they came up with this. (sorry for the small rant, i have restrained myself from making it longer.)

This is what I was going to say.

No competitions...Really? MLG,gamebattles? And you create a lobby with friends then go to matchmaking.

I may have been out of the loop for a long time in this sort of thing, but how are you going to connect to a lobby without a server browser? (probably stupid question for that im sorry)

and more importantly for the competitions, since you are not allowed your own private servers, how do you propose you stop the matchmaking service from throwing random players into your match completely destroying any game in progress, im talking about clan matches here, and generall competition.

1: Party Lobby. Its where your team/friends form up before looking for a game.

2: Private Matches. Seriously, have PC gamers never heard of these? You just make a private match, then invite or give the IP to the people you want to join it.

 

[Fumbles]

well you can say goodbye to any type of competitions, playing with freinds, and any mods with keep the game alive (witch usually keeps people playing the game), im sorry but what were they thinking when they came up with this. (sorry for the small rant, i have restrained myself from making it longer.)

This is what I was going to say.

No competitions...Really? MLG,gamebattles? And you create a lobby with friends then go to matchmaking.

I may have been out of the loop for a long time in this sort of thing, but how are you going to connect to a lobby without a server browser? (probably stupid question for that im sorry)

and more importantly for the competitions, since you are not allowed your own private servers, how do you propose you stop the matchmaking service from throwing random players into your match completely destroying any game in progress, im talking about clan matches here, and generall competition.

1: Party Lobby. Its where your team/friends form up before looking for a game.

2: Private Matches. Seriously, have PC gamers never heard of these? You just make a private match, then invite or give the IP to the people you want to join it.

^^^THIS^^^

 

[digitalman]

I agree with Funk in that the traditional server browser model could use some revamping. The MW1 version wasn't always too intuitive even. Making interfaces accessable to new players is something in every developer's interest. Promoting a difficult mechanic as a wall to keep "n00bs" out doesn't help a gaming community grow and develop.

However, I'm not sure this is the driving force behind this decision. We have seen over the past few years how developers and publishers are trying to find new ways to monetize their games beyond just the initial sales. Many developers have already come under pressure to "MMO-idify" their games, as the potential (or imagined =P ) profits behind monthly income as opposed to a single month of high sales is intoxicating to many. And where this is not possible, (RTS, FPS games) this same concept is nevertheless applied where applicable.

So we have systems like Battle.net and IW.net, even XBox Live. The goal behind these systems is not necessarly to make the multiplayer experience easier (though there is some incentive to do this) but rather to lock-in and funnel a game's playerbase to a single site where it can then be monitized, whether via an access fee or delivering ads. From a business perspective, it makes wonderful sense. Why settle for a few weeks of sales when you can harness the community for the years that they'll be playing your game?

I'm not entirely opposed to this concept so long as it represents a value for the player. But too often we're witnessing traditional freedoms that PC gamers have enjoyed as a result of these changes. There's no technical limitation to why dedicated servers and LAN connections cannot function along side services like Battle and IW.net, and there are many games that exist where both systems function (Supreme Commander's use of GPG.net and LAN play comes to mind.)

It seems all too apparent to me however that this is not a technicial limitation, but a business decision hoisted upon the gaming community. Frankly, I'm not comfortable with where it's going.

 

[zidine100]

well you can say goodbye to any type of competitions, playing with freinds, and any mods with keep the game alive (witch usually keeps people playing the game), im sorry but what were they thinking when they came up with this. (sorry for the small rant, i have restrained myself from making it longer.)

This is what I was going to say.

No competitions...Really? MLG,gamebattles? And you create a lobby with friends then go to matchmaking.

I may have been out of the loop for a long time in this sort of thing, but how are you going to connect to a lobby without a server browser? (probably stupid question for that im sorry)

and more importantly for the competitions, since you are not allowed your own private servers, how do you propose you stop the matchmaking service from throwing random players into your match completely destroying any game in progress, im talking about clan matches here, and generall competition.

1: Party Lobby. Its where your team/friends form up before looking for a game.

2: Private Matches. Seriously, have PC gamers never heard of these? You just make a private match, then invite or give the IP to the people you want to join it.

1. Okay, thanks for the info.

2. please excuse my stupidity, but how are you suppost to make private matches, without the ability to make your own servers . Also please note where i specifically said private servers, witch usually equates to private matches in most gaming termanology, no need to be patronising, sorry if i took that the wrong way.

edit: ahh dang, i just noticed dedicated servers, my bad, sorry for the brain fart. And i also didnt relise this was going to be p2p (yes i should have guessed, but damn it i wont!), so you dont actually need the private servers for making the games, yet again, im an idiot.

 

[WickedSkin]

This is terrible. Yet another consoleization of PC gaming. STAY THE HELL AWAY FROM MY GAMES CONSOLE!

I will not buy MW2 for this reason alone. FUCK YOU INFINITY WARD!

Stop trying to kiss console-tard ass all the fucking time! That goes for all developers who tries and/or will try to do this.

FREEDOM HATING FUCK-WANKS!

I agree with Funk in that the traditional server browser model could use some revamping. The MW1 version wasn't always too intuitive even. Making interfaces accessable to new players is something in every developer's interest. Promoting a difficult mechanic as a wall to keep "n00bs" out doesn't help a gaming community grow and develop.

However, I'm not sure this is the driving force behind this decision. We have seen over the past few years how developers and publishers are trying to find new ways to monetize their games beyond just the initial sales. Many developers have already come under pressure to "MMO-idify" their games, as the potential (or imagined =P ) profits behind monthly income as opposed to a single month of high sales is intoxicating to many. And where this is not possible, (RTS, FPS games) this same concept is nevertheless applied where applicable.

So we have systems like Battle.net and IW.net, even XBox Live. The goal behind these systems is not necessarly to make the multiplayer experience easier (though there is some incentive to do this) but rather to lock-in and funnel a game's playerbase to a single site where it can then be monitized, whether via an access fee or delivering ads. From a business perspective, it makes wonderful sense. Why settle for a few weeks of sales when you can harness the community for the years that they'll be playing your game?

I'm not entirely opposed to this concept so long as it represents a value for the player. But too often we're witnessing traditional freedoms that PC gamers have enjoyed as a result of these changes. There's no technical limitation to why dedicated servers and LAN connections cannot function along side services like Battle and IW.net, and there are many games that exist where both systems function (Supreme Commander's use of GPG.net and LAN play comes to mind.)

It seems all too apparent to me however that this is not a technicial limitation, but a business decision hoisted upon the gaming community. Frankly, I'm not comfortable with where it's going.

I like you.

I will tell you kids now "Games for Windows" and "Windows Live" is going to be the worst thing that ever happened to gaming. Trust me on this one. It might be a while before they show their true face but... shit is going to go down and none of us can stop it.

 

[teh_gunslinger]

Seriously, that was an horribly lame article. I never thought I would say this about the Escapist. Have the author not read anything that people have been saying? Does he need another magazine to realise that it will ruin communities and private moderation.

Predictable freak out, indeed? Is the author that in love with horrible console systems and lack of freedom? For the first time I'm actually disappointed in this otherwise excellent magazine. Bah!

Why would anyone be happy with being tied on both hands by IW and their system. Dedicated servers are a mainstay of PC gaming.

At first glance, this seemed to be - and on some level, continues to seem to be - a classic example of "They Changed It, Now It Sucks." [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheyChangedItNowItSucks] I could understand the furor over the lack of mods, since mods are always fun, but - of all things - complaining because we're not using traditional server technology? Are all FPS games going to have to have a server browser from now until the end of time? What happens when genuinely better tech comes along?

When better tech comes let's use it. But why use crappy constrictive systems when the current way is a lot better? What happens when IW closes their servers?
Matchmaking is genuinely NOT a better technology.

Let's face the music, PC gamers: Server browsers are usually clunky and unintuitive. In trying to teach a (non-PC-gaming) friend how to play TF2, the first twenty or so minutes were just spent on how to sort through and select a server. I know that we PC gamers like to think of ourselves as an exclusive little club of special kids who hold high reign above those console lowlifes, but really? Are people really complaining about a more easily accessible game with modern matchmaking technology?

What people are complaining about is a system that randomly puts you together with potential twats instead of allowing you to frequent well moderated servers. As part of the Escapist you should know how good it is to be able to ban idiots, biggots and racists surely?
I for one have no interest in being fucked like the console gamers get. I don't use my PS3 for online for a reason.

Edit: also: look at L4D and the truly crappy matchmaking system!

 

[DTWolfwood]

Yes. The MMO writer for this site sure doesn't think PC gaming matters.

My frustration stems from the fact that nobody seems prepared to give them a chance. It's a kneejerk "RABBLE RABBLE IT ISN'T WHAT WE'RE USED TO RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE," and smacks of just being forced out of one's comfort zone. Like I said in the original post - are all FPS games from now until the end of time going to HAVE to have dedicated servers? If IW thinks that it has created a better alternative with its own proprietary system, why fly off the handle before you - or indeed anyone outside the company - knows about it?

I'm not saying that they HAVE perfected a model that outstrips dedicated servers, but sooner or later, someone will. And this outrage at someone trying to change things - with a hugely anticipated title no less - means that fewer people will have the incentive to try. I think it's ultimately more damaging to the PC gaming industry, which is already one of the least accessible in the entire space.

I gave it a chance with a peer-to-peer matchmaking game already. Dawn of War II sprung that crap on me already and from my experience, its been negative. I've stated before that if this lag problem on PC was fixed already than i'd have no problem with its implementation. But i'll be damned to spend $60 and be a ginnie pig to there 'new' peer-to-peer mechanism.

I'll even be fine with a delay on the game for PC, as i've already expect it now a days. (BF1943 for example) but again, i'm not buying this game and its all i can do at this point to make a point.

It may seem like a kneejerk reaction to you but i spoke from personal experience with this system on PC and i do not like it! in the least bit on PC.

p.s. love your MMO articles and vid reviews btw XD

 

[Caliostro]

At first glance, this seemed to be - and on some level, continues to seem to be - a classic example of "They Changed It, Now It Sucks." [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheyChangedItNowItSucks] I could understand the furor over the lack of mods, since mods are always fun, but - of all things - complaining because we're not using traditional server technology? Are all FPS games going to have to have a server browser from now until the end of time? What happens when genuinely better tech comes along?

YES.

Because "genuinely better tech" has not come along yet. Why should we downgrade something that's working perfectly fine?

I'm gonna stop you right here because, once again, this post is full to the brim with personal bias.

You say server browsers are "clunky and unintuitive", but how much more fucking intuitive can it GET?

You click a button conveniently named "refresh list" or "get new list" (which, considering there's only one list around, should be self-explanatory), wait a few seconds, and the game gives you the full listing of current servers with their info, and you pick one you want.

How is this confusing? Have you EVER gone to a restaurant of any kind? Even McDonalds. You go in, see the menu, and pick whatever the fuck you feel like eating. Do you think this process could be greatly improved by having the guy behind the register guess what YOU want to eat?

What if next time you walked into a coffee shop or restaurant the waiter just brought you whatever the hell it thought you wanted? No menu, no order. Much simpler in theory.

Or what about going in a clothing shop, with nothing for show, and the guy there just says "you want these pants". And you have to buy the pants. No "What models do you have?". No "Can I see some pants?". No... that's unintuitive. The guy just decides what you should buy based on statistical data. Much better.

If you have a friend that's really having issues figuring out server browsers either you're a horrible teacher or your friend has problems larger than not being able to play a videogame online. The only way technology could get any more intuitive than letting you pick your preference out of a detailed list will only come once we can read and decode brain patterns, so the game can just instantly known which game you want before you have to do anything else. Until then, "quick join" or "matchmaking" buttons are nice, but only as an option... Like when you ask a waiter what he recommends.

Also, no mods of any kind is more than a little issue... There's only 7 pages of discussion on the subject after all [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.150217?page=1].

 

[SilentHunter7]

It wasn't servers themselves - it was the ability to play only certain maps over and over again, or only a certain gametype. If there had been an MM playlist that did that, that probably would've been more popular. But fortunately, no dev has been stupid enough to try that yet.


The reason MM is better is for one simple reason: Math. Including server lists at all will eventually lead to some players getting screwed out of an enjoyable experience 100% of the time. This is inevitable, and apparent in every game, from BF2 to TF2, that uses sever lists.

With MM, this cannot happen. No one can ever be screwed 100% of the time. Everyone gets to be happy with their selections sometimes, dissappointed at others. It prevents one group of players from exerting their will over another group.

Wait...last post you just said people use server lists to join games that play with the settings they like, and then just now you said that players are forced to play settings they don't like. Which is it?

I know people find that a scary concept. But everything one wants, is not something one should get. You, by virtue of yourselfishness, can completely invalid the $30-$60 one has spent on a game because you and your friends have arbitrialy decided that the map and gametype that person likes are "unworthy" of being played. MM ensures everyone gets some happiness out of it, at one time or another.

Yeah, because the veto systems in every mainstream console shooter totally empowers the minority. And I don't know about you, but when half the time MM sticks you with some 11 year old who thinks he can rap, or 16 year old who's entire vocabulary consists of expletives, it ruins the entire game, even on maps and settings I like, and even if it's just one person. At least on every server I frequent, the mods would kick them.

And stop bringing up the modding thing. Its nigh-pointless, and unmoddable games continue to crush both mods and their base games in players and games played, pretty much squashing the slef-inflated importance of modding.

Don't tell that to Valve employees.

EDIT: Wait, unmoddable? I've yet to see a PC game come out that hasn't been modded. MW2 is going to be no exception. If people can find a way to mod KOTOR, they can find a way to mod this. The only difference is that this is the first game I've ever heard of that forbids custom online matches with mods.

 

[shadow skill]

-snap-

They do well because people are ignorant, and ironically enough some of the biggest online games on consoles do use dedicated servers hosted by the game manufacturer. This has been going on since the PS2 with Socom. Also keep in mind that the practice of selling or renting out servers for console games could be done. User generated mods have been done on consoles (See UT3.) there is no reason for consoles to be stuck with a lesser experience in terms of connection, and user generated content. Are you going to tell me that the lack of user customizable controls in console games is a good thing just because you happen to like the defaults?

yes, if it means I can put in the disk, hit start and be able to join seventeen servers before someone else even has their configured, a majority of console games have a sever filter option that allows you to simply choose what level you want to play on, or what game type. All Im seeing from this is immature complaining. If you can prove to me why a game, where the developer said they were going to treat it as the same on every platform, should have an exception for the pc, then I will admit im wrong, Ill start out with a few I can think of:

Server Communities : A majority of pc games have the dedicated server system, which allows for players to join in games with pre-built communities, not to mention play modded game types and maps.
Counter-Point Matchmaking allows you to be able to play with more players instead of the same twenty or thirty, this is how I have made friends on consoles more than PC [with the exception of Arma], this also means that its not stopping you from playing with the same people, as chances are you will be able to player search/game invite your friends, so this argument is losing steam unless your just complaining about not being able to play "yet another zombie" mod.

Dedicated Servers = less ping! : Yes, they do, Im not going to lie about that as I even search for low ping servers in every game I play.
Counter-Point Internet Connections : If your afraid of not having a good connection, shouldnt you get a better ISP or even a higher bandwidth? Even with a eight-meg. connection I still have good pings on 87% of all servers I search for. And with/if this game uses the CoD4 matchmaking, it will always choose the person that can continue the match best, so yet again, Im not seeing why this is a big deal.

Dedicated Servers are easier to moderate : Yes, they are, trust me when I say I know the agrivation of being in a server with a Goron or myg0t, though hilarious [thats just me], sometimes I just want to set down and have a good game before going to work.
Counter-Point Matchmaking would also mean that a system is in place that tracks players, they can implement a way to report a player [much like VAC] and suspend/ban them from a/the game, OR even give the host the ability to boot players off of the game. Before you cry "ADMIN ABUSE!", you cant tell me in every game available right now with dedicated servers there isnt admin abuse.



In all this is a good move for IW, as now they only have to focus on gameplay dynamics and issues that arrise, though knowing them they are just sitting around grinding to 10th prestige to give us a giant "HA HA!" when the game ships. I never understood why people try to weigh the good and bad points of platform versions of games, yes Valve are PC freaks not releasing anything ever for TF2, yes Bethesda are kinda dicks for not letting PS3 people get DLC, yea the Wii has possibly the funnest console web-browser available, but god knows its a sin against gamers everywhere when the PC version of games get the same treatment as the other versions.

So what prevents you from selecting match making if you want it, and someone else choosing a server if they like? Because you want to play a certain way and you are so immature that you revel in people getting shafted because you get shafted with the console version (Despite there being nothing stopping the manufacturer from allowing mods or private servers. Aside from network policies dictated by the console manufacturer.) everyone else should suffer? Everyone should play the way you play?


Ps. You know one of the most critically acclaimed games this generation on consoles boasts mods. It's called Little Big Planet. One of it's biggest draws is the user developed content! So it's quite obvious people will in fact utilize mods if they are available whether they be maps, or more in depth conversions.

 

[Frank_Sinatra_]

I know that we PC gamers like to think of ourselves as an exclusive little club of special kids who hold high reign above those console lowlifes, but really? Are people really complaining about a more easily accessible game with modern matchmaking technology?

When you put it like that it sounds like the console players are the more intelligent people.
PC gamers, is it really that bad? Can you not just accept change when it hits you, or are you going to complain about it every time it happens?

Edit: The mods I can understand though.

 

[DazZ.]

Already had a bit of a rant over this, but it's fucking stupid.

They have only taken dedicated servers away because they are going to charge for DLC. If they gave us dedi servers we could have new maps fine without having to pay.

In the long run they are going to be paying to keep servers up to host every game played, surly that will cost them more money over time??

 

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

Well, that's my final nail in the coffin. Doesn't look like I'll ever be purchasing MW 2.

Man, never thought there would be a day where I wouldn't buy an Infinity Ward CoD game.

 

[shadow skill]

I know that we PC gamers like to think of ourselves as an exclusive little club of special kids who hold high reign above those console lowlifes, but really? Are people really complaining about a more easily accessible game with modern matchmaking technology?

When you put it like that it sounds like the console players are the more intelligent people.
PC gamers, is it really that bad? Can you not just accept change when it hits you, or are you going to complain about it every time it happens?

Edit: The mods I can understand though.

That other people lay down and die, does not make them right. It would be like taking away keyboard customization, and then trying to tell people it's not that bad because most console games don't allow the person actually playing the game to set the controls up in a way that is comfortable for them! Accepting something like that wouldn't make people smart, just like accepting this will not.

 

[Bretty]

And hey we may not buy the game. But I wonder how many people will pirate it?

I want to join my Buddies servers whenever and not have to wait for peeps to come on.

Your Bringing me down man, BRINGING ME DOWN!

I guess Funk missed the boat on this one aswell.

 

[DTWolfwood]

Every where i read up on this issue i get the same feeling that the Press as a whole just likes to side with the industry big wigs. No thought that perhaps the gamers (in general not just PC) may have a legitimate complaint at the moment. Its all about the $$ and i really just wish someone at IW and Activision would just come right out and say "Its Cheaper doing it this way and more money for us" instead of these excuses: IW & Activision's response [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/95538-Get-Decked-Out-in-Assassins-Creed-Replica-Gear]

i dont see how the casual and moderate players would even come into this discussion as they dont play games like this on PC

also wtf do they mean that more ppl are left out doing it the old way and the disparities in skill lvl. Holy crap god forbid u play some1 who is good at the game. *facepalms

 

[digitalman]

I know that we PC gamers like to think of ourselves as an exclusive little club of special kids who hold high reign above those console lowlifes, but really? Are people really complaining about a more easily accessible game with modern matchmaking technology?

When you put it like that it sounds like the console players are the more intelligent people.
PC gamers, is it really that bad? Can you not just accept change when it hits you, or are you going to complain about it every time it happens?

Edit: The mods I can understand though.

I don't think it's an issue of PC gamers accepting change, but rather one of having choices removed. I agree that it would be nice to make it easier for online multiplayer with services like IW.net, (see my post above) and I'm actually interested in seeing what benefits they can deliver. However, when other methods of connecting are removed, I'm inclined to believe that this is not a technical decision, but rather a business and marketing one.

There's been a imbalance for a while between the PC and console platforms, especially with regards to content delivery, advertising, and how that it monitized. I think what PC gamers are fearing (and is not getting adaquately discussed) is that the usual open platform of multiplayer gaming is slowly being modified to more closely resemble the closed-model that is console gaming.

 

[Skizle]

Further proof that consoles are a cancer that is destroying gaming.

if it really is a "cancer" then PC gaming will die from the overwhelming "cancer". choose your words more carefully next time.

 

[Frank_Sinatra_]

That other people lay down and die, does not make them right. It would be like taking away keyboard customization, and then trying to tell people it's not that bad because most console games don't allow the person actually playing the game to set the controls up in a way that is comfortable for them!

But they aren't taking way the customization, they're just switching up the servers. If you go back into the comments with no real bias towards servers you PC gamers are just whining.
Not a very progressive bunch are you?

The dedicated servers are nice to have yes, but for a game like MW2 having matchmaking servers like the ones on consoles will be better for it.
Why?
Well because it'll help ease in newcomers instead of alienate them. If PC servers alienate users it's just going to kill PC gaming. Consoles are liked because of their ease of play so beginning gamers have and easy time of jumping in. So (again) is it that bad that MW2 is trying to make the PC more approachable by taking away the servers and putting in different ones? NO.
PC gaming needs more people to help it grow, or consoles will take more and more of your consumer base. I'm sorry but that's probably a hard truth that you'll just have to swallow.

Like I said earlier though I can understand how taking away mods is irritating.