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

[fix-the-spade]

First, a developer team should have complete control in their creation, at all times. Infinity Ward is making a product

A product to sell, once you've sold something, it's out of your hands.
You're basically saying that all mods and custom gametypes should be illegal then?

If you get a DVD nobody tells you what times yuo can and cannot watch it and which brand players. Buy a car and nobody tells you what you can do to modify it (although maybe they should) or where you can drive it.

Why should a developer have any say at all in what the players who have paid good money do with the game? If I want to pull my game apart and put it back together as something new why the hell shouldn't I?
Unless there's some fundamental shift between what IW are doing on PC and console 'matchmaking' they are effectively killing off the mod and clan communities.

PC gaming's pretty much based on the developer giving up control once the game's out. It's why things like Quake still sell fifteen odd years after release and why PC titles tend to lead where the console games follow. IW are basically limiting their sales and the game's lifespan by not allowing other people any control, after a few months it's going to die out when people get bored and there's nothing interesting left to do.

 

[Sneaklemming]

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

When you join a multiplayer game and you join quickmatch or something similar and the game connects, that uses central servers from the developer, or more likely, a peer system, where all server are run from the client.

Dedicated servers are what you see when you refresh a serverlist in multiplayer games- you know the idea of join a server and having that in your favourites and the server being a static place that usually has constant settings.

Maybe someone can explain it better...

 

[Irridium]

It iss an awful thing.

Taking away dedicated servers on a PC game is like taking away matchmaking on a console game.

I play Team Fortress 2 with the TF2 group on this websight. And a lot of them are from the U.K. It does get laggy, but its bearable, thanks to the dedicated server we use.

If there was no server, that means one person would have to host a 24-person game all on his connection.

Do you have any idea how laggy it would be hosting 24 people when more than half are from the other side of a freaking ocean?

 

[Kollega]

No,it's not. Dedicated servers make use of PC's technical benefits,and losing benefits for the sake of standartization is never a good thing.

 

[zidine100]

you can easily see why companies would want to remove dedicated servers, after of course they decide that its time for them to remove their games that they have hosted, it will force people to buy there next game to keep playing in a relatively lag free enviroment, and effectively make all the fans of the previous game who were playing multiplayer buy there new sequal.

 

[scotth266]

First, a developer team should have complete control in their creation, at all times. Infinity Ward is making a product

A product to sell, once you've sold something, it's out of your hands.
You're basically saying that all mods and custom gametypes should be illegal then?

You're twisting his words. All he said was that the developers can do what they want with their games when they make them.

You're implying that IW is against mods and such, which just isn't true. They're simply making their games a different way now.

 

[Sneaklemming]

you can easily see why companies would want to remove dedicated servers, after of course they decide that its time for them to remove their games that they have hosted, it will force people to buy there next game to keep playing in a relatively lag free enviroment, and effectively make all the fans of the previous game who were playing multiplayer buy there new sequal.

Well that is just speculation... but- if they were going to try something to milk it- they would from their next game, charge a monthly fee to play on IWNET...

but we're getting into speculation territory

 

[zidine100]

you can easily see why companies would want to remove dedicated servers, after of course they decide that its time for them to remove their games that they have hosted, it will force people to buy there next game to keep playing in a relatively lag free enviroment, and effectively make all the fans of the previous game who were playing multiplayer buy there new sequal.

Well that is just speculation... but- if they were going to try something to milk it- they would from their next game, charge a monthly fee to play on IWNET...

but we're getting into speculation territory

*puts on conspiracy hat*

all in good time, they have to get people to acept these things slowly, for example before that they would have to get rid of lan servers, because of hamatchi (sp?) and the sort, then introduce premium items, and then well....

im going to take the tin foil cap of right now before i embarrass myself further, but i have a feeling that it will happpen eventually, probably, if the industry continues going the way its going.

 

[Crunchy English]

First, a developer team should have complete control in their creation, at all times. Infinity Ward is making a product

A product to sell, once you've sold something, it's out of your hands.
You're basically saying that all mods and custom gametypes should be illegal then?

If the developer wants it to be? Yes. A hundred times yes. If Valve doesn't want you using the Source engine. You don't get to, end of story. If IW doesn't want mods interacting with their code, too bad. Any mods that have ever existed did so because of the good graces of the companies involved.

You wanna play your own game, tell your own story etc? Cool but you either need to start from scratch or have the support of the developer.

Now, if a developer that doesn't support the mod community can survive is another argument, but my point stands.

Also, for Sneak, by slanted I mean it was presented in such a way to make the only options freedom, tyranny or apathetic stupidity.

Obviously, in that light, we'd all prefer to be in control of our own entertainment. That's just not the whole story.

 

[sx890410]

i played CoD4 for its singleplayer storyline, but maybe that's because i'm weird and didn't own the game (it was on a friend's pc in a uni computer club). i'd get mw2 just for its awesome singleplayer storyline if i had or could afford or had access to a machine that can run it

First, a developer team should have complete control in their creation, at all times. Infinity Ward is making a product

A product to sell, once you've sold something, it's out of your hands.
You're basically saying that all mods and custom gametypes should be illegal then?

If the developer wants it to be? Yes. A hundred times yes. If Valve doesn't want you using the Source engine. You don't get to, end of story. If IW doesn't want mods interacting with their code, too bad. Any mods that have ever existed did so because of the good graces of the companies involved.

You wanna play your own game, tell your own story etc? Cool but you either need to start from scratch or have the support of the developer.

Now, if a developer that doesn't support the mod community can survive is another argument, but my point stands.

Also, for Sneak, by slanted I mean it was presented in such a way to make the only options freedom, tyranny or apathetic stupidity.

Obviously, in that light, we'd all prefer to be in control of our own entertainment. That's just not the whole story.

also QFT.

you don't own the rights to the game when you buy a game. you're just buying the right to use it (or something along those lines. i can't remember the exact wording). the developers still own the rights to the game. they made it, it's their intellectual property, why the hell should you own it for a measly $100 or so?

 

[Dys]

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.

While I agree with a lot of what you're saying here, I cannot stand it when people try to pass off consoles as a cheaper alternative to computers. This simply isn't so, the life of a computer is far greater, several years ago my dad spent about $1200 on a home PC (no it doesn't run crysis on full, but it can adequately play everygame I've thrown at it). Since then my household has bought an xbox ~$300 and an xbox 360 ~$650. That's $950 on the console gear alone, given that new release PC games can be picked up from as little as $60 (assuming you know where to look, $80 is the most I'd pay), classic PC games are usually $10-$20 and a new release console game is usually $100-$120 (though I did get brutal legend for $80 recently), platinum PS3 games are selling for $40 (xbox 360 are probably slightly cheaper, I don't know as I've lost interest in it to my shiny new ps3). Basicially, if you buy more than 10-15 games per generation, the PC is far cheaper.

Then there's the indy market, as well as all the freeware PC games and mods to take into account. Just to reiterate, I do agree with most of what your saying, the devs should be allowed to release a game as they see fit, and it is a lot easier for someone unfamiliar with technology to use a console than a PC. It just isn't cheaper for the gamer. I'm not even convinced it's profitable for the dev (though it is often is for more expensive projects). Same deal with piracy, it's a lot easier to claim a certain crack has several hundred thousand hits and therefore several hundred thousand people have pirated it than it is to follow all the game pirating in open markets (especially in southeast asia), the piracy argument is not one for this thread, but I'll just make it known I think your opinion on it is misinformed.

OT: Dedicated servers are not coming to an end. Do you think companies like valve, who rely so heavily on their community are going to ditch it? It's a bum move by activision in this instance, and probably a decision they won't be making again (at least not with this sort of game). No doubt if they didn't already have so much staked in this new matchmaking system, they'd go for something else. Despite it being cool to hate them right now, they aren't aiming to piss off their fanbase, they are however, trying to be a profitable company.

 

[Crunchy English]

Hmmm, Its like we're on different worlds Dys. Must be a geography thing. I buy most of my games used from my own store and never pay more than $35 for console games. $650 dollars for an Xbox 360? I paid $180. Now, my prices are in Canadian dollars, so obviously theirs a disconnect here. Also, my "gaming" PC which gets a fair bit of use on strategy games like Evil Genius, Starcraft, Freedom Force (All of which can definitely be picked up for $10 or less just like you say) cost me $1000 dollars and it just has onboard video, for decent nVidia card I'm out another $100.

 

[Sneaklemming]

snip

Well that is just speculation... but- if they were going to try something to milk it- they would from their next game, charge a monthly fee to play on IWNET...

but we're getting into speculation territory

snip

im going to take the tin foil cap of right now before i embarrass myself further, but i have a feeling that it will happpen eventually, probably, if the industry continues going the way its going.

Next they will remove mouse and keyboard support on PC games...

snip

snip

snip

Also, for Sneak, by slanted I mean it was presented in such a way to make the only options freedom, tyranny or apathetic stupidity.

Obviously, in that light, we'd all prefer to be in control of our own entertainment. That's just not the whole story.

Well I've changed the poll to match your point, as it is valid. However this thread is about games in general and the trend towards dedicated servers, not just one game. If all games took this route, it would very much be the final nail in the coffin for PC gaming.(aside from removing mouse and keyboard support)

sip

snip

snip

snip

also QFT.

you don't own the rights to the game when you buy a game. you're just buying the right to use it (or something along those lines. i can't remember the exact wording). the developers still own the rights to the game. they made it, it's their intellectual property, why the hell should you own it for a measly $100 or so?

No, I'm afraid all this is currently in limbo due to a court case which I believe is either ongoing or over, where some guy brought a music company(i think) to court saying he had purchased a product, and that they sold it to him. The idea that when you go into a shop and have "sold" to you a licence for a game, is at this point not true. I'm sure someone here could find the court case I'm talking about if I created another thread... But you don't buy licences for games; you buy games.

snip

snip

OT: Dedicated servers are not coming to an end. Do you think companies like valve, who rely so heavily on their community are going to ditch it? It's a bum move by activision in this instance, and probably a decision they won't be making again (at least not with this sort of game). No doubt if they didn't already have so much staked in this new matchmaking system, they'd go for something else. Despite it being cool to hate them right now, they aren't aiming to piss off their fanbase, they are however, trying to be a profitable company.

The however isn't the case. It was once put to me that what makes common sense, doesn't always make business sense.

Business aside there are the examples: L4D has a system which looks and acts similar to a system without dedicated servers- matchmaking and no server browser etc. Operation Flashpoint has no dedicated servers. Borderlands also does not have dedicated server support (as far as I can tell- and if it does, it hides it very well).

That's a pretty major trend; and we're on the slow side of christmas, hopefully that will be it, but l4d2 will almost certainly have the same system as l4d; and who knows about Bioshock2 and all the other console-lead games?

 

[Ocelot GT]

Simple question to IW. If it's so awesome and accessible to have no ded servers...

Then why hasn't EVERY other game on the PC done this?

-TF2
-CSS
-BF2
-BF2142
-UT3

etc etc

 

[Crunchy English]

Simple question to IW. If it's so awesome and accessible to have no ded servers...

Then why hasn't EVERY other game on the PC done this?

-TF2
-CSS
-BF2
-BF2142
-UT3

etc etc

Because matchmaking technology hasn't been as stable in the past? Because Dedicated servers were the preference of the people developing the software? Maybe that was just the old way of doing things?

Obviously MW2 is getting the press here, but Sneak wanted to talk about general trends. Maybe Dedicated servers are the old way of doing things. Let me put this in a real world context:

"Hey Mr. Smith, why aren't you paying your electric bill? Everyone has to pay for their electricity! You can't live without it!"

"Actually Mr. Jones, I use solar panels to power my house now. It's how I prefer it."

"What! Solar panels are expensive and clunky and inefficient. They were a nice pipe dream but they can't compare with the hydroelectric energy I use."

"Well, I'm sorry you feel that way Mr. Jones, but actually I've discovered a few things about solar panels in the last few years, and when you're in my house, the power you use will be solar."

A bit heavy-handed, but I think it illustrates my point well. Also, apparently I want to write simplistic dialogue today, maybe I should look into writing a children's story.

 

[Valine]

Now developers can effectively control the whole multiplayer experience.

Are you saying that is a good thing?!? o.0

 

[Rhatar Khurin]

Whilst i don't ever play on non-official servers, more options are always good.

 

[NickCaligo42]

I never was much into multiplayer, mostly because my dad would never open up the necessary ports on the freaking router to actually do it, so I'm not much into the PC gaming dedicated server-centric model. But I definitely think it's a bad idea to not have the option for players who want it--and it seems that the entire PC market wants it. I can tell you that I am really big into trying out mods and levels just for the fun of it, and I think it's especially stupid that they're trying to take that aspect out of the hands of players when their most successful competitors are trying more and more to put that in the hands of players. What's more... new maps on PC have always been free. They're taking a free resource and trying to charge for it. Maybe on the console that works, since otherwise there's no model for distributing new maps, but PC gamers, from years and years of experience, know a lot better... killing those features may as well have been killing the PC version in my opinion.

 

[Sneaklemming]

Now developers can effectively control the whole multiplayer experience.

Are you saying that is a good thing?!? o.0

It might be- I mean there is a strong case for doing this right, but there are many many was of doing this wrong