Poll: Dedicated servers coming to an end, a good thing?

[Sneaklemming]

Well once infinity ward get away with cutting out dedicated servers- and Borderland and Op. flashpoint have already done away with them, is this the end?

Is it a good thing? Now developers can effectively control the whole multiplayer experience.

On the other hand we lose mods, community bases, freedom to customise, good pings(in most cases)and reliable connections.

Honestly when I look at it... I'm horrified.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

No this is not the way forward in anyway shape or form as it takes away from the game in everyway and adds nothing good or new to experience excpet hardship on the community.

 

[Ocelot GT]

No no and no.

Lack of ded servers essentially kills professional clan wars. Also the MP lifespan of a game is often dictated by the mod community.

BF1942 would be half the game it was if it wasn't for DC. Half Life would be quarter-life if it wasnt for TF Classic and Counter-Strike.

 

[Mr.Black]

I thought Infinity Ward had a big fight with Activision and somehow they weren't allowed to use dedicated servers? I don't get it.

Either way, I'm inclined to not even get MW2. I mean, the campaign is fun once. The only reason you'd buy a CoD game is for the multiplayer.

 

[Kajt]

No. Power to the gamers, give us dedicated servers.

 

[Crunchy English]

Well that poll was pretty slanted wasn't it? First, a developer team should have complete control in their creation, at all times. Infinity Ward is making a product, it's their decision (and, because of a less than perfect world, the publisher's decision) what features go into a game. If you wish to have a gentlemen's disagreement with those parties, I respectfully submit that this is an incorrect avenue. There's no one left on earth who doesn't know about this, there's no more "raising consciousness" about this "problem". At this point you can either have a personal boycott and avoid the game because of a missing feature ( a perfectly rational response) or you can swallow your pride and pay for a less than perfect game (Equally rational).

Secondly, I like how you had a condescending insult aimed at console gamers thrown in there just to make sure you couldn't be taken seriously. Say what you will about console gamers, the industry's evolutionary tract seems to support them over you. Developers stand to make more money, gamers can enjoy more games at a cheaper cost (not counting the PC's indie segment which should remain thankfully untouched), developers have to worry a lot less about piracy and games will be made more accessible for people.

"How do I, a Technophobic caveman of the 1980's know if this game will work?"

"On the PC its easy, just read this list of technical data on the side of the box and match it to your unique system. Sure you only have a rudimentary knowledge of what any of this is, and a lot of people like you can't even bring up your computer's specifications on command, but other than that, easy."

"On consoles match the colours. Green-boxed games work on the green and white system, white boxes on the pure white system and the clear plastic boxes work on the grey and black system."

I know this hard. You see this as another step in the inevitable demise of PC gaming. Just remember its not anything you did. Except maybe the pirates, those people suck. Consumer culture simply prizes conformity and the company specific over the universally compatible and diversity. I know it feels like you're losing this round, but its really just the way of things, accept it gracefully.

 

[Numb1lp]

Why do the developers have to control everthing?

 

[Flishiz]

I would hate online gaming if dedicated servers were out completely. It means developers keep people from thinking. The best of humanity is it's ability to think. Any restriction of the mind is an insult to your own DNA. To be less abstract, some people can see and do what developers can't. That's why dedicated servers are essential to online gaming.

 

[Sneaklemming]

Well that poll was pretty slanted wasn't it? First, a developer team should have complete control in their creation, at all times. Infinity Ward is making a product, it's their decision (and, because of a less than perfect world, the publisher's decision) what features go into a game. If you wish to have a gentlemen's disagreement with those parties, I respectfully submit that this is an incorrect avenue. There's no one left on earth who doesn't know about this, there's no more "raising consciousness" about this "problem". At this point you can either have a personal boycott and avoid the game because of a missing feature ( a perfectly rational response) or you can swallow your pride and pay for a less than perfect game (Equally rational).

Secondly, I like how you had a condescending insult aimed at console gamers thrown in there just to make sure you couldn't be taken seriously. Say what you will about console gamers, the industry's evolutionary tract seems to support them over you. Developers stand to make more money, gamers can enjoy more games at a cheaper cost (not counting the PC's indie segment which should remain thankfully untouched), developers have to worry a lot less about piracy and games will be made more accessible for people.

"How do I, a Technophobic caveman of the 1980's know if this game will work?"

"On the PC its easy, just read this list of technical data on the side of the box and match it to your unique system. Sure you only have a rudimentary knowledge of what any of this is, and a lot of people like you can't even bring up your computer's specifications on command, but other than that, easy."

"On consoles match the colours. Green-boxed games work on the green and white system, white boxes on the pure white system and the clear plastic boxes work on the grey and black system."

I know this hard. You see this as another step in the inevitable demise of PC gaming. Just remember its not anything you did. Except maybe the pirates, those people suck. Consumer culture simply prizes conformity and the company specific over the universally compatible and diversity. I know it feels like you're losing this round, but its really just the way of things, accept it gracefully.

Hey well, in fairness I did say that by removing ded servers it gave IW more control. You can argue that the studio is the artist and that they should have full control of their work!

Of course though, "the Poll" is meant to be unbiased, but "the post" is biased, and is meant to be, "the post" is where I state my opinion.

On the whole completely off-topicness of the console thingy, yeh I poking fun. I don't own an xbox/ps3; lack of Big TV being the reason. That said if they released a keyboard and mouse I'd get one tomorrow - somehow!

The whole issue anyway is that I'd expect IWNET to be quite good, and last many many years. COD4 didnt have much in the way of mods on servers- but its the trend that is worrying

I can't see the dedicated servers on operation flashpoint lasting too long- its only saving grace being the LAN support you can use for Hamachi!

So thanks for the long post; and can you just say what you mean by "slanted" (unless its in regards to the console thingy, coz that aint moving, this here is a PC thread, lol)

 

[Sneaklemming]

I would hate online gaming if dedicated servers were out completely. It means developers keep people from thinking. The best of humanity is it's ability to think. Any restriction of the mind is an insult to your own DNA. To be less abstract, some people can see and do what developers can't. That's why dedicated servers are essential to online gaming.

Heh DNA... like the developer thing?

 

[WrongSprite]

Honestly? I'm play PC games, but I havn't got a clue what a dedicated server is. What's the difference?

 

[sunami88]

The results (at the moment) being 89.3% against echo my own opinion.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

Until the technological advancements reach the point where every home system is capable of dealing with the server load of, say, a small corporate network then I say no. If for nothing more then the bottle neck it will create. Consider it, if you will, a no cause it will create way to much LAG!

Who would of thought it?

Connecting through a home DSL line, to hardware that isn't up to running a server for a dozen simultaneous connection while also running a client as well creates lag.

Dedicated servers, for the most part, tend to be systems designed to deal with the sort of stuff running a sever requires. Home systems? Not so much so. A few, top end, machines are capable of it this day and age but the vast majority of people do NOT have these systems. Even those who do, I did till the MB died, are struggling with other problems such as bandwidth.

In Australia, for sure, the limitations of our connections alone will ensure an additional 150-600 ping being the NORMAL without dedicated servers. I do not see this being a 'good step forward.' How do I know this to be true: Removing deticated servers from games isn't something new. I have witnessed this, personally, and like many others who have done so I chose NOT to play said games.

 

[fix-the-spade]

Is it a good thing? Now developers can effectively control the whole multiplayer experience.

From a PC players point of view, this is pretty much the nightmare scenario.

Honestly, I hope Modern Warfare 2 gets no multiplayer traffic at all. Or a dedicated server mod (more likely)

Console players might think it's ok to have no mods, no admins, laggers, no autokick and no ability to choose where you play. But really that's a load of crap.

The accessability argument's a load of crap too. If someone can't get their head around a server browser they really shouldn't be exposing themselves to the big wide gaming world, they clearly aren't ready for it yet.

 

[Sneaklemming]

Is it a good thing? Now developers can effectively control the whole multiplayer experience.

players might think it's ok to have no mods, no admins, laggers, no autokick and no ability to choose where you play. But really that's a load of crap.

this is the main issue I have, is that admins would become a thing of the past- and as anyone who plays lots of PC fps multiplayer, the ability to have a moderated server, that kicks teamkillers, griefers, idiots, or microphone spammers is crucial to a good server.

I don't join clans, and I find the article by game informer to be quite offending that they suggest that dedicated server are for pro-gamers to set up private matches or public ones in such a way they can grief people. - That couldn't be further from the truth

Here's the link btw-game informer link [http://gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2009/10/20/modern-warfare-2-dedicated-server-response.aspx?PageIndex=9]

but really I should just be creating a seperate topic to talk about how condescending Game Informer were about the issue

 

[AlphaOmega]

Its a bad thing, console gamers should be allowed dedicated servers tbh.

Without dedicated servers stuff like Counterstrike, Team Fortress, etc wouldnt be like they are now. and we wouldnt have prophunt in tf2 either

 

[Lucifus]

Is it a good thing? Now developers can effectively control the whole multiplayer experience.

From a PC players point of view, this is pretty much the nightmare scenario.

Honestly, I hope Modern Warfare 2 gets no multiplayer traffic at all. Or a dedicated server mod (more likely)

Console players might think it's ok to have no mods, no admins, laggers, no autokick and no ability to choose where you play. But really that's a load of crap.

The accessability argument's a load of crap too. If someone can't get their head around a server browser they really shouldn't be exposing themselves to the big wide gaming world, they clearly aren't ready for it yet.

Exactly. I love my dedicated servers, often regular people play and build up a community. Idiots are normally banned right off without having to worry about bumping into them in another game.