|
|
IW responds to Modern Warfare 2 server snafu
Author: Joe MartinPublished: 21st October 2009
Infinity Ward has stood by it's new matchmaking system for Modern Warfare 2, IWNet.
Infinity Ward's comments come in a confusingly aggressive article that stand firmly alongside the developer; "This may shock some gamers with advanced persecution complexes -- this move was not made to tweak the noses of the PC community," writes GI's Adam Biessener.
An online petition against Infinity Ward's lack of support for dedicated servers and the roll out of IWNet has gathered more than 100,000 signatures since the system was first announced on Monday.
"We're just prioritizing the player experience above the modders and the tuners," said Infinity Ward's Jason West, who says the team got a huge amount of feedback from players who said they couldn't find good servers to play the original Modern Warfare on because of modders, skill disparities and cheaters.
"We thought maybe it would be cool if the fans could play the game," laughed West.
Infinity Ward stands by the idea that IWNet will offer the best experience for the majority of gamers and says that this, not piracy fears, were the main reason for the changes.
Let us know your thoughts in the forums.
Related
Comments (100)- Site Links:
- About
- Email Editor
- Newsletter
- Privacy
- RSS
- Score Guide
- Our Other Websites:
- Auto Express
- Channel Pro
- Computer Buyer
- Computer Shopper
- Den of Geek
All content © bit-tech.net 2000-2010
© Copyright Dennis Publishing Limited licensed by Felden
fair matches against similiar skill level of players, so if you haven't had time to play the game every waking moment like some, you still have a good chance of enjoying a fair game.
to many pc fanboys stuck in the past if you ask me. if you don't like it then don't play it.
dont worry cjoyce1980, we wont be playing it, we'll be playing something better.
Wow so modders had a hand in ruining COD4 for some so called "fans" of the game, honestly what the **** is going at IW. I would like to see the statistics for this feedback but I know it doesn't exist in significant numbers. It's just another excuse being peddled by IW to hide the obvious reason which is to make money of DLC which will be the only option for new maps.
If this system was so awesome why didn't they mention it earlier, it's because they knew that this wouldn't go down well with PC gamers so they hid it for as long as possible. I can understand developers wanting money, cracking down on piracy, hell 3 layers of DRM would be better than this, it's sad to see IW following or being forced to follow the new Activision policy of screw the gamer over if it makes us more money.
Borderlands will get my money instead of this.
We can't judge or hate upon a new formula before we've really tested it. Perhaps if this was just for a players ranking ladder?
To be fair, the issue here could have all just been solved with server filters on a browsing system. As I do usually find a server I enjoy and stick to about 5 - 7 as you get regulars who you get to know etc.
But, lets be a little bit more mature about this?
Not surprising that an American company finds a new way to screw consumers is it though...
All because they want 2 Ferraris, 2 houses etc...etc...etc....just pure greed.
screw the lot of them.
If they climb down and reinstate servers i will gladly reinstate my pre order, if not i will happily turn to certain sites on release day without a moments guilt or hesitation.
Once the single player campaign is done and dusted i will discard it......with no multiplayer component worth a damn if bought legitimately, im not missing out on anything.
Take note IW, this is what happens when greed runs your company...
That would make too much sense and the kiddies couldn't complain.
That bit will be true, but not sure how many 'fans' will be left on PC.
I think Borderlands will get my cash until something more worthwhile appears on the PC.
Same. Cancelled my MW2 pre-order, used the money to pre-order Borderlands instead. Seems like IW's screw up will do wonders for Gearbox's sales.
Give us dedicated servers you ****sticks.
yup this is what i've done! seriously though which of the two looks more original and interesting? i reckon we might end up being right chuffed that IW are a load of x-box humping tards
Also it never occurred to IW that with the current scheme, there will be no "fans" to like the new system... This is so retarded it just makes me angrier every time I hear about it.
Don't fix what ain't broken.
I know they use dedicated servers too, but L4D still uses a lobby system..
Also, I see infinity ward thinks modders are the evil guys, when a certain company (I think called 'Valve') has made probably the best games ever, from the help of modders (DOD:S, CS:S). Why can't more companies support the community rather than putting there corporate willies up our bums.
:(
Because they want more money....its not complicated.
I would play on the iw.net for a quick game with no mods but i want the choice to play on a server with pro-mods or custom maps and i think that that is the big problem they could so easily fix
That is different, you can still use a server browser and dedicated servers can have custom maps, mods etc since they aren't controlled by valve. It was basically a matchmaking interface to the standard dedicated server system. The issue here is that this will be a P2P matchmaking system ONLY which is generally inferior in terms of network performance to a dedicated server.
Well, he could have at least been polite rather than releasing a statement that looked like it was written by an insolent 10 year old child and filled with sarcastic undertones. Clearly they have no respect for the PC community, so why should we bother to show respect to them?
COD4 MW2 was eagerly anticipated by the competitive community. Not too sure what will happen now.
Don't like the fact they are not supporting the modding scene. I think they have forgotten their roots and become too big for their boots.
Don't give up fighting anyone.
I'm pretty sure that despite such a large protest it is far too late for them to change an aspect as large as this so close to release date.
No dedicated servers = no mods, so no, not if they don't put them back in.
And the PC version isn't £55, that's just the PS3 and 360 versions after the console tax, and even then you can get it for ~£45, ~£35 on the PC. That's still expensive compared to other games, though.
Should we all just sell the PC's, buy one of these and become console gamers. Its gonna be the same experience.
no it wont, i dont want to play with 10 year old chavs whose every other word is "****"
Why? It doesn't say anything we don't already know about how matchmaking systems work on the consoles. It's just more marketing tripe to try and make you think that IWNET is better than dedicated servers.
If you want make a PC game, you have to let someone who knows something about PCs do the talking.
There's still a chance IWnet uses servers and that you just aren't allowed 3rd party ones. In which case, it won't be too bad, because there shouldn't be too much lag. However This is unlikely, and listen servers will be all we can have, and nobody will play because the lag will be ridiculous.
that's not true. A listen server is the same as a dedicated server, just running on somebody's home computer. All they would have to do is permit us to use it on a separate server machine.
No clear method of getting clan matches going?
I'm not flipping out about it, but that just seems a bit retarded.
The tone of the statement is also a very ill advised release. I understand it can be frustrating dealing with the community because some responses are not tempered by, well anything resembling an adult attitude. However, a company shouldn't behave in a childish manner in response!
Catering to the masses is simple business. But I would argue the masses are going to be clans and mates wanting to play as a group. I'm hardly a harcore player but I'll want to get online with 3-4 mates and play this together.... any ideas?
I really doubt anyone from IW would bother hosting a server in India. I know it's not worth the cost, but those 20-odd people who'd want to play MP, and would rent/buy a server can no longer do so.
They're just thick and greedy.
Ok, i'll not lie, i don't understand the details too much, i just play but how is what you just mentioned (A listen server on a server machine) different to a dedicated server?
Since when did players need to have their own server.
Call of Duty hasn't been on my list since CoD2.
If dedi servers won't come after all then it's a no go for me and will be spending my money on BFBC2
Since they were playing with team members who aren't all from a similar location and having a dedicated server allowed them to get the best ping possible for them and their opponents.
I'd like the option to "just play" with players around my skill level, but i would also like the option to choose, so that i can partake in clan matches, so that i can choose to join a server with the lowest possible ping and be challenged.
Yes, L4D has this matchmaking system by default, but it also allows some degree of freedom to choose a server to play on, and the ability to take part in with my friends.
For competitive gameplay, not having a dedicated server sucks anyway.
As for all those hinting at piracy of this game, I can only shake my head in disbelief as this solves nothing in either the short term or the long term. Sure, you may get the singleplayer but at the same time are merely driving the nail into the coffin that appears to be support of the PC as a gaming platform for developers confronted with an everwider console market with less danger of loosing money spent of producing these games to pirated copies.
I think the much more sensible idea is to go out and buy a game you wish to play that has less controvesy about its elements. Hell, you may even be surprised and stumble on a game you never knew or mod for that matter that means you can support those who do follow your ideals of online gaming on the PC.
Apologies for the rambling and no offence is meant but the need to vent is overwhelming!
And to be honest the IW statements seem to completely miss the bulk of the issue, and then tried to do a little switch around with "It's a little dubious. Some of the people complaining are complaining with their pocketbook.".
Excuse me? With hundreds of thousands of signatures and complaints, the small collection of dedicated server providers are a drop in the ocean.
And the comment about "insular communities" is also laughable - people form these groups because they like playing with equally skilled people who aren't abusive idiots. That's why people set up their own public servers and why players have a favourite list in every other game. The real players who keep games alive past the first 6 months don't want to have to join a server full of mindless vitriol and unfounded complaints of cheating. Then again, I guess the rate they are churning the COD franchise games out means they no longer care about people actually playing the game.
Oh well now I don't really have such a huge problem picking up L4D2 which I wasn't going to initially but suddenly all the annoyance of that debacle pales in comparison.
Never too late to include a patch, although that would be super expensive for them, and we know they like their money.
Cod 4 you just ran it and played it. good 'ol days
Microsoft had the right idea ( just shockingly implemented) with the Passport, one login for everything.
Sure enough "all your eggs in one basket" is the downside but still....
Anyhoo, Back on topic with you.
The problem is that most of the consistent players of Modern Warfare tend to form their own small communities based on the server system. I know that the way I've always played is that I find servers with low pings, people I play well with, good map selections and enjoyable game modes. Then I add them to my favourites list and just keep playing on them. What is wrong with that? I have found a server that meets my criteria for quality simply by playing on it, and one I've found it, there's no reason for me to find another ever again. There is a certain consistency in there, especially as you start to become more familiar with individuals.
But what happens with a P2P-based system? You have no central servers, which means in general pings will be higher, along with a host advantage (making things totally unsuitable for clan or professional play), a lack of custom maps and mods (many of which players find essential to the game), which is almost assuredly to both discourage piracy and encourage DLC sales, and a lack of control by players over the precise maps and game modes they can actually play (due to idiotic playlists), as well as over individual variables like weapon balance, killstreaks available, spawn duration and location, in-game voice chatter ("OUR UAV IS ONL- UAV ONL- OUR UAV IS- OU-" etc.), violence levels, and anything else that you may want to change.
They want to make it "easier" for the end user, but it was never hard for the end user in the first place, provided that user had played a PC game before, and frankly if you're too stupid to figure out a server browser (yet somehow smart enough to buy/build a gaming computer, hm...), I don't think I want to play PC games with you!
As stated dozens of times, it has nothing to do with ease of use and everything to do with control. I was a bit worried about having to balance playing Modern Warfare 2 and Dragon Age: Origins this holiday, but now I know I'll be just fine with Dragon Age, because Modern Warfare 2 is going on hold until it's way less expensive ($60, **** you Activision, you have enough money already, you fat slugs), and/or until this server bullshit gets sorted out. At this point I'd rather burn my money than give it to Activision.
Surely the games won't be played by client host?
So dedi servers will still exist?
And these will be connected to by using a similiar lobby system that tragically split the L4D communtiy when it first arrived?
Will the new CoD's lobby system also include a team match making system like the one soon to arrive on L4D?
So clans can still compete?
And will it incorporate a chat system and friends list to help maintain communities?
It won't be less expensive for a long time. I don't know why people keep saying that they're going to wait until it gets cheaper. CoD4 came out and $50 and now sells for $40 after two years, why would MW2 sell for anything less than $40 after two years?
And Valve did it with L4D. We all expected another PC styled FPS with the freedom we had come to expect with HL:DM CS CS:CZ CSS etc and then we got shafted with the console styled lobby system we use now. Thank god they are releasing the update to allow team-match-making ... if a year too late, but at least it'll help make L4D2 a much better game.
I totally agree with you, Valve should never have changed their system, IW shouldn't have changed theirs.
We are now leaning over the top of a steep cliff and very soon ALL PC games will likely go this route to keep their costs down ... sorry! I mean shareholders happy.
If it fails to sell significant numbers they will reduce the price until it sells well enough to narrow the losses or turn a profit.
Because this game now looks like it will more likely go the way of COD5:WAW. Which can be found as a shiny tea coaster in many a bedroom.
Current prices:
Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare - Steam £29.99 - Play £29.99
Call of Duty: World at War - Steam £29.99 - Play £29.99
It will not sell so little units as to not profit from sales. Call Of Duty has too much of a name built up already.
Too bad.
This is true, but also recognise the fact that L4D will only have 8 players maximum when playing Versus, or 4 for the campaign. So the bandwidth and so forth required is considerably less. Additional things like use of perks and so forth are key for me online.
I despise servers that disallow any of them and all I want is to play on the ZiiP servers with my mates, regardless of skill, rank or ping. I have a great laugh regardless and now this is currently shot dead by IW. Twats.
Of course there are plenty of mindless pc proponents running around spouting bullshit as well, which is equally as frustrating.
****ing lol with regards to the last few days eh? Shows how much marketing bullshit is involved with this game.
Spoken like a true console fanboy. Let me try to explain it to you so someone of your lack of knowledge can understand it.
I grabbed this from another forum thread. I think it sums it up pretty well.
"If you have never played on a PC, and your multiplayer experience has only been delivered to you via matchmaking, then you will never really understand.
But try to imagine a host hosting a game while never turning his console off, and you can always reach that room and play there whenever you want, night or day, because its always on.
Now imagine that host has a Pentagon grade internet connection and his X360 can handle 64 players in that room.
On top of that, the guy who's the host is actually resurrected Ghandi, so you will all be treated with respect, anyone using racial slurs, being offensive or just detrimental to gameplay experience via TKing or exploiting glitches, is going to be removed from that server forever.
Now imagine dozens and dozens of custom maps running on that server, which you will get for free, because IWs not making them. Then imagine entire communities and forums built around that one room (server).
You recognize people who visit that same room, you befriend them, you have fun with these familiar folks."
Holy ****....
You're an idiot.
And you know what, sometimes i don't want to play against people of the same skill. Sometimes getting my ass handed to me on a silver platter is a good way of improving (seeing how they do things, little tactics people use e.t.c)
My Pre-order remains cancelled, and I wont be picking this game up on PC or console now. I bought COD4 MW on both the PC and the PS3, and probably would have done the same for MW2.... but due to the arrogrance of IW/Activitision.. I can live without it.
LAN PARTY is one example! You ever been to a PC LAN party? 50 times more fun (IMHO) than gaming online with a PC or console. Nothing better than gaming face to face with your own screen (no console splitscreen B.S.) You NEED a dedicated server to host for eveyone in the room.
4 Days before release they come out and say "Got ya!!! You'll get your servers!!!" And the community will be like "Stuff that game in your a**es. We don't want it anymore"
PC gamers have a looooong memory. I won't even buy Rockstar developed games since the moronic PhD who destroyed Star Trek Legacy WORKS there now, Dr. Ian Davis (ironically Rockstar bought Maddoc, changed the name to Rock Star New England and now they make console titles).
I hope to see some of these clowns in RL at game conventions, if someone dumps their soda on you fools, that might be me, ooops sorry!!!
Yours in Vengeful Plasma,
Star*Dagger
We can't judge or hate upon a new formula before we've really tested it"
Sure, like this system hasn't been used before?
I've experienced many good quality p2p games such as war rock, combat arms, halo 2, and cross fire.
For your information, those games are ****ing awful just because of how much lag there is. If one player lags at all, you lag, and everyone lags. P2P is for South Korea and Japan, not Americans on Comcast and Cox, Europeans on Virgin and Orange.
Good luck with that bullshit.
you can choose who you want to play with, and choose a particular dedicated server via steamgroups.
Passport has been around since 2005
Single player will do, as its free.
My kids will enjoy it with a joypad and ill play it properly with mouse and keyboard!
Simples
Why do people thinks consoles are hard to pirate?
http://www.geeks.co.uk/7282-activision%E2%80%99s-bobby-kotick-hates-developers-innovation-cheap-games-you
Wonder why Starcraft 2 is now £90 with no LAN and a 'map store'?
The first PC game I ever took online was UT2k3 (that was what I was playing in my transition from dial up to broadband). What a learning curve! That game was so fast paced and had so many tricks to it. The community here was so small that I was playing in a ctf server with players that had actually competed in WCG for UT and 50yo women using a tracking ball instead of a mouse. And it was great.
The team based gameplay meant that there was always a chance the pro player would be distracted and I would finish him off (satisfying as hell) and the community was usually mature enough to balance teams equally with good and bad players. This meant that the bad players always had someone on an equal level to play against, yet could learn a significant amount off their superior team mates.
That 16 player server was full from the moment I got home from school to the moment I went to bed, until the day ut2k4 came out, and everyone knew each other.
Matchmaking will always be a laughable load of crap compared to that experience, and that's not even bringing up the horrors of P2P lag.
there is no way this will last. This company will tank with this kind of attitude
these days were the best of PC gaming
and by how much, exactly, is valve kicking the rest of their asses in the monetary department?
(ya, i'll give you the fact that steam is helping quite a bit, but still...)
Well not necessarily. Any multiplayer game can foster a small community just like this (although I haven't yet enjoyed a game as much as UT) as long as they have DEDICATED SERVERS. I still live in hope that I'll find another great game/community, it just won't be MW2.
Here's the fundamental problem:-
Most computers don't make very good servers and will never even be remotely as good at it as a dedicated. This is because A) It's full of viruses B) You're running the CoD4MW client + All your background **** C) You've got a crap connection and D) By offloading the host process onto the clients machine, you've practically countered all the "hacking" and "cheating" you've prevented by using VAC (VAC is better than PB tbh, so this is good).
As far as I'm aware this is how it'll work:
You join lobby/matchmake.
Player A is host.
All the other 7 players, B,C,D,E,F,G and H, are connected to him.
Player A is running the host process.
Some downsides to this:
Player A is on a home grade UK connection. 8mbit. He probably has a maximum upload speed of 50kbps, and that might be pushing it. I'm on 8mbit and I only get around 25kbps at full upload and with that going I can't do ANYTHING else on the internet.
Player A is running the host process meaning he has access and control over the "server" you guys are playing on. This means he can use a technique called "lagswitching" (hooking the orange cable of cat5 upto a lightswitch to enable/disable the connection) to cause you to freeze for maybe 3 or 4 seconds whilst he blows your brains out, then can resume. Or he can just generally use it to annoy you by lagging all over the place.
Player A is running the host process meaning he's directly connected to it. This means this player has an inate advantage over every other player. He has 0 ping. Lush, eh?
Lets say Player A leaves, In Cod4 on Playstation, you'd get dumped out the game. Anyone connected to him would just drop. Sucks. Hopefully MW2 will offload the host process onto another player, meaning the server stays up.
Another note is how demanding it is to run the game AND the server process at once. Some CPUs, older dual cores mainly, may have issues with running both of these side by side which could lead to glitches in playing, unstable play, etc, etc.
What if the player has crap hardware or a hardware fault? If their memory throws back an incorrect set of whatevers for the host process...boom goes your dynamite.
The only way I can think that this would work and allow large battles as before (You wont be able to have like 8v8. I'd imagine 5v5 would be a push on the above system) is to have some sort of "shared" host process that runs on every client who connects to the server. The problem with this is that then every client has access to some part of the data controlling the server. This would make it feasible to do stupid things like JUST CRASH THE SERVER. Why? Why not! Griefers will do anything for a laugh.
And on the note of cheaters....I couldn't afford MW1 when it came out so I staved off playing it. With MW2 announced I borrowed my friends copy but had to crack it and play on cracked server. Playing daily for a month now, I've not seen a single cheater on any CRACKED server I've played on. If there aren't that many cheaters on CRACKED servers...Surely it can't be that bad on legal ones?!
IW should realise that a DEDICATED server is better for delivering a stable customer experience because it's DEDICATED TO A SINGLE TASK. The only way this matchmaking system will work is if dedicated servers are included. L4D runs a similar system. You can still have dedicated servers for private use, but there's also the public lobby system. All they have to do is have "Ranked" and "Unranked" servers and any lobby games get automatically put onto "Ranked" servers which conform to a strict ruleset defined by the code.
But the game is gold, no chance of additions like this before release. We're going to have to wait for a patch I guess.
CoD-UO = Great (even with lag)
CoD2 = Pile of crap
CoD-MW = Decent enjoyable game
CoD-WaW = See CoD2
MW2 = Not even gonna try
Slightly unimpressed with what I have been hearing and reading with regards to this.
I was hoping for a nice suprise, but with all the lack of this and that (no demo etc.) I am no longer interested in the CoD series.
I will continue to play on CoD-MW servers, only because with the mods and established community, there is nothing that can beat it for fun.
MW2 is not on my wants list, another developer needs to step in, and create a game for the community, something which MW2 isn't.
I pass......................next!
not likely going to buy it (may do thought) the new battlefield is what i want, i want my old game back :) (hate dice for not fixing the server crashing bug for 6-8 months 1 month after 2142 came out as they Had to fix the bug as it used BF2 code that the beta had the same server crash )
I bet IW is thinking "Why did we do this?!"
CSS on the other hand works as it should and enables me to pick and choose servers that I want to revisit. Add players to my list, build friendships, clans, mixes, socialise ...
Forget these consolised lobby systems and server selecting, they are for the very casual gamer who doesn't take gaming as seriously as PC gamers always have.
On a side note, I love my PS3 for what it is, a pick-up-and-put-down-quick-fix-toy with no social aspects what-so-ever.
It's all about cost saving with the publishers. I'm hopeful that the devs don't really think these changes in PC gaming are a good idea. If they do then it's obvious they have lost their direction and need to rethink these strategies. If we wanted our PC games to play like console games then we'd have sold the PC and be sitting in front of our TV's annoying our girlfriends/fiances/wives screaming down useless USB headsets at n00b children griefing.
If you check out the multiplayer trailer on play.com, near the end there is an indication of what probably happens when the host drops, the game pauses for a few seconds whilst a new host is allocated
http://www.play.com/Games/PC/4-/10109313/Call-Of-Duty-Modern-Warfare-2/Product.html
Hilarious :)
Err ..that's the thing. It's not just about community dedicated server support. Modding is gone. There won't be a mod SDK thus no servers with any mods other than the ones IW runs.
This is all a load of crap. They're ruining the game and then they charge more for it? I really cant see the logic there. All PC-users should just boycott IW and go spend their hard earned money on something else than their crappy games. Sure, SP might be good, but I ain't paying full price for a 5 hour long game with no MP. My money goes to Borderlands, just like several others have already said.
Loads of people are skipping their preorders, I sincerely hope that IW can understand why, and stops doing crap like this. I also hope that other devs see what IW's doing wrong, and avoid doing it themselves.
Btw, this has to be the longest comment-thread I've seen here on BT in years. Good going guys!
i dont think it will be very long
I'd rather deal with positive American people and or companies than skint jealous negative moaning Brits like you any day of the week. In case you did not realise, games are made to make money. Not to make you happy. I for one will support superior US products over British crap every time.
I am not buying MW2 as frankly it is uninteresting. Borderlands on the other hand....
Think again. If it does ever come, it almost certainly won't be until after any DLC content has been released and they have made their money from that.
Erm, in case you didn't realise, you can't acheive the former without the latter. Games that don't make you happy invariably don't sell well.
And aside from the fact you seem to have missed all the excellent British game development studios, this isn't a superior American product at all, this is an inferior one ruined by the greed of corporate executives.
If America made a superior product, I would support that over other crap everytime, no matter where its from. As most people want the better product instead of a piece of crap.
What are they, retarded? I would have bought this game before they decided to screw the PC community. Now if I get it at all, it will certainly not be through legitimate channels.
As for "giving the player the same experience whether they use a console or a PC" - It was our choice to be PC gamers, and consoles gamer's choice to be console gamers. each have traditionally had their own advantages and disadvantages.
- Give us a break from your politician talk - you're cutting corners for easy profit. I hope it backfires :(