• Steam recently changed the default privacy settings for all users. This may impact tracking. Ensure your profile has the correct settings by following the guide on our forums.

Multi Modern Warfare 2

When you play cod4/MW2 on the console, isn't it off someone elses connection also? Which is why the game has a host correct?

If so then I don't see what the problem is, it picks the person with the best connection and I rarely, rarely lag in CoD4/MW2
 
QuickJay said:
When you play cod4/MW2 on the console, isn't it off someone elses connection also? Which is why the game has a host correct?

If so then I don't see what the problem is, it picks the person with the best connection and I rarely, rarely lag in CoD4/MW2
Click to expand...

The ones who suffer are those outside USA and Europe. There was only ONE CoD4 server over here in India throughout the game's lifetime and it was in Singapore with 80 latency. We would just wait till a slot was available and join. And it never even showed up in the server browser from here. We had to add the IP to favourites manually. Every other server was 300+ latency and that is unplayable against mouse and keyboard opponents with 20 latency.

On top of that CoD4 doesn't have mutual hit detection. Only the lower ping player will get the kill. Without the ability to join a specific server the PC version will be a complete failure here.

Client hosted games are also a massive failure. The average connection speed is 256 Kbits/s or worse and usually it doesn't transfer at more than 25 Kbytes/s. Very few people have 1Mbit/s connections like mine. You need at least 15Kbytes/s per player for decent update rates.

Come to think of it, everything is a failure in this shithole. No amount of money can bring you happiness, or a decent multiplayer experience here.
 
EvilSeph said:
I honestly didn't think it could get worse after a lack of dedicated servers... I'm sad to say I was wrong.

Edit: Oh, and, so it begins: id: Probably No Dedicated Servers for Rage - Id Software - Kotaku
Click to expand...

That's not as big of a deal though IMO. From what I have seen of Rage, it's nothing like Quake, or any of id's previous titles. The only thing it has in common is that it's an FPS. They probably have a good reason for wanting to control the server environment.
 
QuickJay said:
When you play cod4/MW2 on the console, isn't it off someone elses connection also? Which is why the game has a host correct?

If so then I don't see what the problem is, it picks the person with the best connection and I rarely, rarely lag in CoD4/MW2
Click to expand...

Based on the responses to this issue, I'm under the impression that the majority of our members that primarily play on consoles don't fully understand why the PC community is so up in arms about this.

Consoles are generally straight forward. You get a game and you play it. You generally have some options present in a menu to make changes to the game, but you're extremely limited.

When it comes to PC gaming, we have an enormous amount of freedom that is now being taken away. Sure, it can be said we're crying because we don't get the freedom we previously had and usually that wouldn't be a problem. However, since the first game came out, technically minded individuals have been looking for ways to hack and edit the innards of a game to enable new features or improve performance...so you're really taking away a really big part of our history and what we've all grown up with as being the norm.

From a competitive standpoint or even a serious gamer standpoint, people tend to modify options not found in menus through .ini file editing or console commands to either up the quality of the graphics (past what is possible through a menu) or dumb them down to give them less detail to focus on and stable FPS (even if their PC is a beast).

On a console, you're generally used to having 60-65 fps (or whatever the number is..I'm not really sure right now) in a first person shooter leaving less of a chance for you to notice any or much lag issues or anomalies in the game. On a PC, we can generally achieve 300 fps [even if we technically can't see it] which gives the game more points of failure, resulting in lag and other problems being more easily noticeable.

Why is this important to understand? If dedicated servers have difficulty hosting a decent game, then how will home connections cope? I'm certain if any of you console players were to play on a PC with the general settings serious gamers use, you'll notice more lag when a game is hosted on a home connection. On this same note, in any game where its multiplayer requires one player to be the host, the host almost always has a significant advantage over all the other players. In a general gaming sense, this doesn't matter as much... but when it comes to competitive gaming, any advantage makes all the difference.

Another issue is server hosting. The majority of ISPs out there have an issue with hosting game servers on your home connection (and this seems to only apply to PC gaming). Since you are unable to flag yourself as not-hostable or choose who should be the host, your only choice is not to buy/play MW2 or risk having your account closed by your ISP.

The biggest issue of all is the lack of respect IW/Activision-Blizzard has for the PC community. A large number of the features in MW2 surely must have been inspired by the popularity of a number of community made mods and yet they unashamedly take credit for coming up with the ideas... IW is where it is because of the PC community and now they're giving us the finger.

Lastly, there's the low player count (9v9? seriously?) that's clearly because of the reliance on a home connection and the players' hardware and the lack of recording functionality.

If you've played games on a PC since CS and possibly games before it, you'll realise by now that IW seems to be undoing all the good things that have been achieved for PC gaming... I don't get why they're deciding to go backwards.

I tried to explain as best I could why we're so angered by these poor choices IW is making but I'm not sure if I've done it justice.

So why don't you notice lag? It could be because you're used to it or because of the fps limit I stated above.
 
9v9 is big enough. I've been playing this on the xbox360 and if they put more players on the map, it would lose the tactical feel.

If the FPS limit is an issue, can't you cap the FPS on the PC to 60 then?
If you want to play games, get a gaming console really. I understand there are those hardcore PC gamers who love to brag about how mouse and keyboard is the way FPS are meant to be played, but really I find games to be more fun and easy to play on a gaming system.

I would want people to wait til the game comes out before they judge it. I honestly don't care because I don't play on the PC but if people play on the PC they usually have good computers and internet speed so yeah. I don't think this is going to be a big issue, and if this upsets you, just don't buy the game. No one is telling you to buy the game, it is going to be a great game and sell millions still.
 
The major problem here, is that internet connections are so hopeless, it's impossible to achieve the same quality and reliability of a dedicated server. When I played COD4 on the PS3, all I could play was 6 Player FFA. Everything else was one-bar ping lagfest. In those games, you had to aim ahead of the player in order to register a hit. Once my friend introduced me to CSS and TF2, I was blown away. 24 Player games with zero lag. And then there was the custom game modes, custom maps, server mods. It an entirely different experience.

Carmack says the Dedicated Servers are a relic of PC's history. Maybe the reason they're not gone now is because they work? Now, I have nothing against P2P and Matchmaking. But there isn't one thing in those concepts that cannot coexist with a dedicated server experience.
 
Abe Froeman said:
Or, it could be that lag is not an issue.
Click to expand...

When ya'll have multi-megabit connections and it automatically joins hosts which are probably on the same ISP or even same subnet, it better not lag. In fact this should prove to be better than a dedicated server at some remote location if player density is good enough.

Unfortunately we don't even have the bandwidth to host 1 vs 1 matches.
 
My copy has been shipped today in hopes I be getting it by the 10th,.
 
Lag will undoubtedly be an issue. While most people have enough upstream bandwidth, at least in the US, the issue is that people use their computer to do other things. If I'm hosting a game and someone on my network loads up a torrent, the game is ruined, everyone's ping will shoot right up. You don't have to worry about this problem with well run dedicated servers.
 
Once again, I've found both p2p and dedicated servers to both be about 50/50 in the connectivity department. I play pc and consoles equally, and I've never found one to be better than the other. I like pc because I find the people to be generally nicer, but there's also a higher chance for hackers.

At the end of the day, both have their advantages, none of them I can see being lost with out dedicated servers.
 
I buying the PC version. I just beat it on my flash 360. Super fun


Hope I can use my PC version on 4 different computers (LAN Play) without no privacy issues.
 
3rd person mode is where its at.
I find it so much more fun then first person. Reminds me of socom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top