I'm not buying it, though I don't recall ever infering I would've otherwise or that I would pretentiously 'boycott' it.
I do feel that the removal of dedicated servers in such a game is a move for the worst, I've explained in other games why it is necissary for PC gamers where it isn't for console gamers, but I'll breifly summarize it here. I can see why people care, and it is definately a stupid system to implement, but it hardly affects me.
-P2P hosting with matchmaking on consoles works, all consoles are built the same and they rarely crash (neither my PS3 or Xbox 360 has crashed during gameplay since I've owned them). Computers, on the other hand, may crash regularly depending on the hardware and software in use. Makes for a rather frustrating matchmaking experience, especially as the host cannot vouch to not host if they know their computer is unstable. As the host is decided on the strength of their connection, you also may get hosts who's computer does not have the computing power to host a listening server (which drasticially lags the game while a more appropriate host is selected). The general inequality of computers means that matchmaking on PCs just isn't a workable solution for games with more than 4-6 players (even 6 player games of, say, company of heroes are often very laggy).
-Dedicated servers require browsing and, more often than not, an out of game server browser (such as xfire or steam). I don't think I need to point out that this system would be cumbersome on consoles, given the practicality of P2P on that platform it just makes sense to use matchmaking. It also helps that both Sony and Microsoft pour significant money into their online services, this makes the whole matchmaking process a whole lot easier for both devs and users (obviously such support doesn't exist on the PC platform). More of an argument as to why consoles use P2P than why PCs shouldn't, but I feel it's worth noting. Yes they both suffer from crappy ISPs, but that aside the system is far better suited to the console platforms.
-As pretentious and lame as it may seem to some, a lot of the reason PC gamers originially liked the Call of Duty series was because of the clan fights. Clans were often built around dedicated servers and they often play 'scrims' or 'clan wars' against each other (which is unimaginably easier with dedicated servers). Again, I realize that clan play exists on consoles, but the way the games have developed in such a way so as to work without them.
-Of course, there's the whole issue of this is how it's been done for years, it holds benifets and allows for the community to support and maintain the game as they see fit at no cost to the developer (I assure you that it would cost more to develop a matchmaking system from the ground up than to simply update the already functional dedicated system from MW1, which runs the same engine), so it seems unfair to remove it. Dedicated servers on consoles wouldn't work (interface aside) as it would require sony and microsoft to host servers (which obviously costs money, as they would no doubt have to police all the custom servers for mods, which microsoft and sony are none to fond of). Consoles players are also far less likely to be committed enough to their game of choice to pay money to host a server. Sure, some would, but most just want to pick up the game and play, the players would far outweigh the servers and the ISPs that often host PC game servers are not likely to invest extra for console servers. Yes, I realize that users are already paying to cost xbox live, but I sincerly doubt many would want to pay more on top of that to use dedicated servers.
I do feel that the removal of dedicated servers in such a game is a move for the worst, I've explained in other games why it is necissary for PC gamers where it isn't for console gamers, but I'll breifly summarize it here. I can see why people care, and it is definately a stupid system to implement, but it hardly affects me.
-P2P hosting with matchmaking on consoles works, all consoles are built the same and they rarely crash (neither my PS3 or Xbox 360 has crashed during gameplay since I've owned them). Computers, on the other hand, may crash regularly depending on the hardware and software in use. Makes for a rather frustrating matchmaking experience, especially as the host cannot vouch to not host if they know their computer is unstable. As the host is decided on the strength of their connection, you also may get hosts who's computer does not have the computing power to host a listening server (which drasticially lags the game while a more appropriate host is selected). The general inequality of computers means that matchmaking on PCs just isn't a workable solution for games with more than 4-6 players (even 6 player games of, say, company of heroes are often very laggy).
-Dedicated servers require browsing and, more often than not, an out of game server browser (such as xfire or steam). I don't think I need to point out that this system would be cumbersome on consoles, given the practicality of P2P on that platform it just makes sense to use matchmaking. It also helps that both Sony and Microsoft pour significant money into their online services, this makes the whole matchmaking process a whole lot easier for both devs and users (obviously such support doesn't exist on the PC platform). More of an argument as to why consoles use P2P than why PCs shouldn't, but I feel it's worth noting. Yes they both suffer from crappy ISPs, but that aside the system is far better suited to the console platforms.
-As pretentious and lame as it may seem to some, a lot of the reason PC gamers originially liked the Call of Duty series was because of the clan fights. Clans were often built around dedicated servers and they often play 'scrims' or 'clan wars' against each other (which is unimaginably easier with dedicated servers). Again, I realize that clan play exists on consoles, but the way the games have developed in such a way so as to work without them.
-Of course, there's the whole issue of this is how it's been done for years, it holds benifets and allows for the community to support and maintain the game as they see fit at no cost to the developer (I assure you that it would cost more to develop a matchmaking system from the ground up than to simply update the already functional dedicated system from MW1, which runs the same engine), so it seems unfair to remove it. Dedicated servers on consoles wouldn't work (interface aside) as it would require sony and microsoft to host servers (which obviously costs money, as they would no doubt have to police all the custom servers for mods, which microsoft and sony are none to fond of). Consoles players are also far less likely to be committed enough to their game of choice to pay money to host a server. Sure, some would, but most just want to pick up the game and play, the players would far outweigh the servers and the ISPs that often host PC game servers are not likely to invest extra for console servers. Yes, I realize that users are already paying to cost xbox live, but I sincerly doubt many would want to pay more on top of that to use dedicated servers.