Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 PC Games Interview - Joel Emslie Video Interview

[Azimuth]

Except that in the context of this particular discussion - a discussion which I am currently participating in, mind you - that post has no relevance whatsoever. See?

And I just posted that as I feel your "comment" in this thread was sparked by the earlier posts relating to the fact that the game may be heavily pirated...hence the quote

If you'd actually bothered reading the thread where I made that post, you'd see it was prompted - significantly, I think - by a discussion about piracy on the MyBB forum, and not a discussion about Call of Duty 4 on the MyGaming forum. So really, it just looks like you're trying to make trouble. :/

 

[Maplassie]

As I have never really used a matchmaking service, I'll reserve my judgement till I try the game and IW.net.

The only worrying thing is, if Private Matches are then to be held by players hosting, it might just be uber fail. I've got a Super line, yes I do, I allways get comments about it, Average ping 16-20 ON any SGS, Igame or IS server. WE have even played with 5 ppl on my line, and our pings were no more than 40. I've got a mate with the same "luck", also has Super low sub 20 pings online in cod4 and cod5, but we have tried privately hosting games and joining one another, and the latency is far worse than joining a dedicated Server room based server with a super pipe. It's not an isolated incident though, even with programs like hamachi,trying to various sources, trying to setup games between ppl, it was just crap. get 10+ players to connect to 1 pc from abroad and your Pings are going to shoot through the roof. I know matchmaking simplifies the finding, hosting and joining parts, but I doubt wether it can better the latency issues?

I think that's one of the main concerns. As I said, I have never used console matchmaking services before, so I won't bash the premise and say it's FAIL till I actually tried it. I'm just worried about the latencies that's all.

 

[Azimuth]

Your ability to host additional players is almost entirely dependant on the speed/size of your line - if you're looking to host more than 2 or 3 players, you'll need a 4mb line at the very least.

Also, as I've said on the NAG forum already, I think there's a lot of clarification needed on this issue still. Matchmaking services and game servers are two entirely separate things - I'm not yet sure than IWNet is actually hosting servers in addition to the matchmaking service. If not, I'd assume the matchmaking service simply redirects to regular servers, and players should be able to set parameters regarding ping, location, and whatnot. Matchmaking is used solely to place players in games with other players of similar skill, wherever possible.

In other words, using IWNet's matchmaking service in South Africa should simply put you into a locally hosted server (IS, SGS, individually hosted, whatever), with players of similar skill.

I could be horribly wrong, however.

 

[Maplassie]

Your ability to host additional players is almost entirely dependant on the speed/size of your line - if you're looking to host more than 2 or 3 players, you'll need a 4mb line at the very least.

Also, as I've said on the NAG forum already, I think there's a lot of clarification needed on this issue still. Matchmaking services and game servers are two entirely separate things - I'm not yet sure than IWNet is actually hosting servers in addition to the matchmaking service. If not, I'd assume the matchmaking service simply redirects to regular servers, and players should be able to set parameters regarding ping, location, and whatnot. Matchmaking is used solely to place players in games with other players of similar skill, wherever possible.

In other words, using IWNet's matchmaking service in South Africa should simply put you into a locally hosted server (IS, SGS, individually hosted, whatever), with players of similar skill.

I could be horribly wrong, however.

Thanks Azi.

I was sort-off thinking the same thing, well more like hoping for. I also agree that we need a bit more clarification on this, and whether it's all going to be Home PC / user hosted based, or if we are indeed getting servers and just getting redirected etc....

 

[hideinlight]

Your ability to host additional players is almost entirely dependant on the speed/size of your line - if you're looking to host more than 2 or 3 players, you'll need a 4mb line at the very least.

Also, as I've said on the NAG forum already, I think there's a lot of clarification needed on this issue still. Matchmaking services and game servers are two entirely separate things - I'm not yet sure than IWNet is actually hosting servers in addition to the matchmaking service. If not, I'd assume the matchmaking service simply redirects to regular servers, and players should be able to set parameters regarding ping, location, and whatnot. Matchmaking is used solely to place players in games with other players of similar skill, wherever possible.

In other words, using IWNet's matchmaking service in South Africa should simply put you into a locally hosted server (IS, SGS, individually hosted, whatever), with players of similar skill.

I could be horribly wrong, however.

No dedicated server means no support from IS or SGS.
Will wait and see what happens, but it's now possible that MW2 could flop big time in South Africa.

 

[Isengard]

I'll wait to see how all this pans out, but I'm not optimistic. The loss of a dedicated servers is quite a blow for PC gamers, especially S.A. gamers. What works for consoles does not necessarily work on PC and vice-versa.

 

[ZenbaaS]

Thanks Azi.

I was sort-off thinking the same thing, well more like hoping for. I also agree that we need a bit more clarification on this, and whether it's all going to be Home PC / user hosted based, or if we are indeed getting servers and just getting redirected etc....

Lol...so you can temporarily hold off the *assasination* mission you had planned

@ Isengard. Yeah I completely agree. Clarification is needed but all seems pretty glum at the moment.

 

[GReeN_ORB]

CoD4 is the second or third most played game on Xbox LIVE, and it's played with matchmaking. So no. This is just PC gamers pulling the big red BUT WE'RE SPECIAL card, and pitching tantrums because publishers are consolidating their online play models.

Clans have no business playing in public matches anyway. And from this interview, it seems private matches are still an option. So what exactly is the problem here?

I don't mean to sound rude, I really don't, but it is obvious that you have NO experience with online FPS PC gaming, much less CoD4. Do yourself a favour, go find a friend with CoD4 on the pc (and an adsl line) and play online to get at least some understanding of both the community and how it functions.

Clan players have just as much right to play in "public" matches as we do to play in clan matches. I have over 600 hours in CoD4, and of that, at least 500 hours have been spent on one or other public server (all of the achievements in cod4 are based on public play, for instance). Furthermore, clan players play public matches on dedicated Promod servers (TDM and S&D). Although the majority of players on these servers are indeed clan players, many "normal" players also join them. Matchmaking would basically deny us the ability to do the above, since the clan players are supposedly "better" than normal public players, and thus normal players will almost certainly not be allowed access to these servers.

I can hear you asking the question "Why is this a problem, though?" The problem is, I have seen players who are decidedly average on regulation servers play on the Promod servers with the better players for a month or two. The standard of their gameplay increases exponentially, with the exposure to the better players. Matchmaking would prevent this. In my personal experience (over more than 6 years of online gaming, mind) is that by playing with players far above your skill level, your own skill level rises much faster than if you were to play with those only on your skill/rank level. Heck, compare those people who have never played online, only on LAN with their friends, versus those who have many years of online experience. I promise you, those people with online experience will dominate, simply because they have been exposed to a far wider range of players and experienced players.

Now, with regard to this post:

Your ability to host additional players is almost entirely dependant on the speed/size of your line - if you're looking to host more than 2 or 3 players, you'll need a 4mb line at the very least.

Also, as I've said on the NAG forum already, I think there's a lot of clarification needed on this issue still. Matchmaking services and game servers are two entirely separate things - I'm not yet sure than IWNet is actually hosting servers in addition to the matchmaking service. If not, I'd assume the matchmaking service simply redirects to regular servers, and players should be able to set parameters regarding ping, location, and whatnot. Matchmaking is used solely to place players in games with other players of similar skill, wherever possible.

In other words, using IWNet's matchmaking service in South Africa should simply put you into a locally hosted server (IS, SGS, individually hosted, whatever), with players of similar skill.

I could be horribly wrong, however.

1) The ability to host additional players is indeed dependent on your line. On both the upload AND the download speed. Currently, the maximum residential speed available is 4mbps download, and 512kbps up. The upload speed is what kills the ability for regular people to host servers. For a full 24 player server, CoD4 needs, at the least, a dedicated 1 meg per second (i.e. 10mbps) upload connection to handle a full 24 player server. Obviously, none of the commercially available lines could possibly meet that demand in South Africa. Obviously, if we are forced to host private matches in order to have 5v5 clan games, it will simply not work. 150+ ping is not acceptable for a competitive game.

2) Matchmaking and servers are indeed two seperate things. However, Bowler specifically states that "You're completely reliant on IWNet and there is no dedicated server or server list" which implies that in this instance, they are not two entirely seperate entities. Lets not even mention the difficulty (impossibility?) of LANning with the game, if it is dependent on an internet connection and online servers.

3) Yes, the Xbox matchmaking service does indeed function like that (I have used it, okay? I'm not a total console neophyte ). However, from what Bowler said, it would appear that the IW matchmaking service isn't the same as the Xbox one.

4) I agree that we do need to wait for clarification. However, what Bowler said was pretty clear, and unless he mis-spoke himself massively, I think we still have a problem.

Some additional points I'd like to make:

This is just PC gamers pulling the big red BUT WE'RE SPECIAL card, and pitching tantrums because publishers are consolidating their online play models

In this case, the online play model for console does not translate well to PC, much the same as console controls often do not translate well to the PC port. PCs, frankly, have a much wider range of abilities than a console, and it makes a lot of sense to take advantage of those abilities. I understand that it takes a lot of time and money to do so, but if the additional abilities are not exploited, what is the point of even developing it for PC? Rather just stick to developing it for console, if that is the case.

I do sincerely hope we are wrong about this whole debacle. MW2 looks like it is going to be an excellent game. Frankly, though, the SP game will not be enough to justify the R500 price, and I am not interested in playing a game in which there is no competitive future, thanks to a lack of MP features.

PS. Zenbaas, I also have absolutely no idea what you are getting at.

 

[ZenbaaS]

I don't mean to sound rude, I really don't, but it is obvious that you have NO experience with online FPS PC gaming, much less CoD4. Do yourself a favour, go find a friend with CoD4 on the pc (and an adsl line) and play online to get at least some understanding of both the community and how it functions.

Clan players have just as much right to play in "public" matches as we do to play in clan matches. I have over 600 hours in CoD4, and of that, at least 500 hours have been spent on one or other public server (all of the achievements in cod4 are based on public play, for instance). Furthermore, clan players play public matches on dedicated Promod servers (TDM and S&D). Although the majority of players on these servers are indeed clan players, many "normal" players also join them. Matchmaking would basically deny us the ability to do the above, since the clan players are supposedly "better" than normal public players, and thus normal players will almost certainly not be allowed access to these servers.

I can hear you asking the question "Why is this a problem, though?" The problem is, I have seen players who are decidedly average on regulation servers play on the Promod servers with the better players for a month or two. The standard of their gameplay increases exponentially, with the exposure to the better players. Matchmaking would prevent this. In my personal experience (over more than 6 years of online gaming, mind) is that by playing with players far above your skill level, your own skill level rises much faster than if you were to play with those only on your skill/rank level. Heck, compare those people who have never played online, only on LAN with their friends, versus those who have many years of online experience. I promise you, those people with online experience will dominate, simply because they have been exposed to a far wider range of players and experienced players.

Now, with regard to this post:



1) The ability to host additional players is indeed dependent on your line. On both the upload AND the download speed. Currently, the maximum residential speed available is 4mbps download, and 512kbps up. The upload speed is what kills the ability for regular people to host servers. For a full 24 player server, CoD4 needs, at the least, a dedicated 1 meg per second (i.e. 10mbps) upload connection to handle a full 24 player server. Obviously, none of the commercially available lines could possibly meet that demand in South Africa. Obviously, if we are forced to host private matches in order to have 5v5 clan games, it will simply not work. 150+ ping is not acceptable for a competitive game.

2) Matchmaking and servers are indeed two seperate things. However, Bowler specifically states that "You're completely reliant on IWNet and there is no dedicated server or server list" which implies that in this instance, they are not two entirely seperate entities. Lets not even mention the difficulty (impossibility?) of LANning with the game, if it is dependent on an internet connection and online servers.

3) Yes, the Xbox matchmaking service does indeed function like that (I have used it, okay? I'm not a total console neophyte ). However, from what Bowler said, it would appear that the IW matchmaking service isn't the same as the Xbox one.

4) I agree that we do need to wait for clarification. However, what Bowler said was pretty clear, and unless he mis-spoke himself massively, I think we still have a problem.

Some additional points I'd like to make:



In this case, the online play model for console does not translate well to PC, much the same as console controls often do not translate well to the PC port. PCs, frankly, have a much wider range of abilities than a console, and it makes a lot of sense to take advantage of those abilities. I understand that it takes a lot of time and money to do so, but if the additional abilities are not exploited, what is the point of even developing it for PC? Rather just stick to developing it for console, if that is the case.

I do sincerely hope we are wrong about this whole debacle. MW2 looks like it is going to be an excellent game. Frankly, though, the SP game will not be enough to justify the R500 price, and I am not interested in playing a game in which there is no competitive future, thanks to a lack of MP features.

PS. Zenbaas, I also have absolutely no idea what you are getting at.

Interforum politics...so NVM

 

[Azimuth]

I don't mean to sound rude, I really don't, but it is obvious that you have NO experience with online FPS PC gaming, much less CoD4. Do yourself a favour, go find a friend with CoD4 on the pc (and an adsl line) and play online to get at least some understanding of both the community and how it functions.

Heh, you're assuming I've only ever played online on console. I bought CoD4 on PC on launch day, actually, and have played it online (although I'll concede that I didn't play much at all). I only picked it up on Xbox about six months later. Although I play most stuff on console, moreover, I still play a lot of Team Fortress 2 online on PC. I've a very good feel for online FPS gaming indeed.

Clan players have just as much right to play in "public" matches as we do to play in clan matches. I have over 600 hours in CoD4, and of that, at least 500 hours have been spent on one or other public server (all of the achievements in cod4 are based on public play, for instance). Furthermore, clan players play public matches on dedicated Promod servers (TDM and S&D). Although the majority of players on these servers are indeed clan players, many "normal" players also join them. Matchmaking would basically deny us the ability to do the above, since the clan players are supposedly "better" than normal public players, and thus normal players will almost certainly not be allowed access to these servers.

I've not had enough experience with the local CoD4 clan community, but the TF2 one sucks balls. Clannies stack against everyone else, and just steamroll the other team. It's unsporting, and it makes the game about as fun as cancer for everyone. I'm sure we can agree that, generally, clannies are playing for Serious Business, while lots of other people are simply playing for fun. It's not a good mix. Clannies are usually the first guys who shout "NOOB TOOB", and really, that's just not an attitude I can get behind at all.

I'm not a fan of stuff like the Promod, either. But this is because I'm fundamentally opposed to organised competitive play. That's an entirely different discussion, however. I'll say, however, that it's my experience of clan / overly competitive mentalities that started putting me off PC online gaming in the first place.

I can hear you asking the question "Why is this a problem, though?" The problem is, I have seen players who are decidedly average on regulation servers play on the Promod servers with the better players for a month or two. The standard of their gameplay increases exponentially, with the exposure to the better players. Matchmaking would prevent this. In my personal experience (over more than 6 years of online gaming, mind) is that by playing with players far above your skill level, your own skill level rises much faster than if you were to play with those only on your skill/rank level. Heck, compare those people who have never played online, only on LAN with their friends, versus those who have many years of online experience. I promise you, those people with online experience will dominate, simply because they have been exposed to a far wider range of players and experienced players.

I can't agree with this at all. Playing with people who are much, much better than you = you getting killed constantly, and ultimately quitting out of frustration. There's definitely a threshold somewhere. Sure, playing with anyone a bit better than you is going to improve your game, but when you're massively outmatched, you don't really learn anything at all. Matchmaking typically looks at a range of ranks, rather than specifically matching a player with people of exactly the same rank. I think that, as a rank 10 player, for example, being matched with rank 8-15 players is just about right.

1) The ability to host additional players is indeed dependent on your line. On both the upload AND the download speed. Currently, the maximum residential speed available is 4mbps download, and 512kbps up. The upload speed is what kills the ability for regular people to host servers. For a full 24 player server, CoD4 needs, at the least, a dedicated 1 meg per second (i.e. 10mbps) upload connection to handle a full 24 player server. Obviously, none of the commercially available lines could possibly meet that demand in South Africa. Obviously, if we are forced to host private matches in order to have 5v5 clan games, it will simply not work. 150+ ping is not acceptable for a competitive game.

I know. I was referring specifically to Maplassie's comments about hosting friends on his line. A 4mb line won't hold any more than 10 players without becoming unstable (it's the same on Xbox, y'know ).

2) Matchmaking and servers are indeed two seperate things. However, Bowler specifically states that "You're completely reliant on IWNet and there is no dedicated server or server list" which implies that in this instance, they are not two entirely seperate entities. Lets not even mention the difficulty (impossibility?) of LANning with the game, if it is dependent on an internet connection and online servers.

Bowler also said something about not being sure of the technicalities. I have gazed deep into my crystal ball, and I predict IW doing some serious damage control in the next day or so.

I'm not sure why LAN play should be affected. Doesn't Steam allow offline LAN play?

3) Yes, the Xbox matchmaking service does indeed function like that (I have used it, okay? I'm not a total console neophyte ). However, from what Bowler said, it would appear that the IW matchmaking service isn't the same as the Xbox one.

Not quite, no. It couldn't be, unless they were relying on individual (player) hosted servers, which would be kinda unprecedented. However, the principle is much the same - disallowing players from browsing server lists, and placing them instead.

In this case, the online play model for console does not translate well to PC, much the same as console controls often do not translate well to the PC port. PCs, frankly, have a much wider range of abilities than a console, and it makes a lot of sense to take advantage of those abilities. I understand that it takes a lot of time and money to do so, but if the additional abilities are not exploited, what is the point of even developing it for PC? Rather just stick to developing it for console, if that is the case.

I think people should wait out IW's side on this before making assumptions about anything. It's a somewhat bizarre move, I'll agree, but until they announce they're charging for online play, it's too soon to start shouting out Activision for being greedy corporate dogpigs. Not directed at you specifically, mind you, but the prevailing sentiment of discussions I'm seeing on the topic.

 

[GReeN_ORB]

Heh, you're assuming I've only ever played online on console. I bought CoD4 on PC on launch day, actually, and have played it online (although I'll concede that I didn't play much at all). I only picked it up on Xbox about six months later. Although I play most stuff on console, moreover, I still play a lot of Team Fortress 2 online on PC. I've a very good feel for online FPS gaming indeed.

Indeed it did come across that way. Wasn't intentional though, since from reading some of your articles, I have surmised that you do actually play PC games online. My mistake.

I've not had enough experience with the local CoD4 clan community, but the TF2 one sucks balls. Clannies stack against everyone else, and just steamroll the other team. It's unsporting, and it makes the game about as fun as cancer for everyone. I'm sure we can agree that, generally, clannies are playing for Serious Business, while lots of other people are simply playing for fun. It's not a good mix. Clannies are usually the first guys who shout "NOOB TOOB", and really, that's just not an attitude I can get behind at all.

You've basically proven the first part of my earlier post. The TF2 community is fundamentally different from the CoD4 community, from both the player and the admin perspective. Understand that I play and admin the iGame CoD4 servers, which are very different to the SGS ones, in turn (we have admins on regularly). Believe me when I say that the admin team on iGame doesn't allow stacking on the servers. Its actually one of my pet hates, and I have kicked/banned clan members for stacking and ignoring my warnings to even the teams.

As for playing for "serious business", sure, there are a few clans who do that. Those clans, however, don't touch the public TDM/S&D/Sabotage/Whatever servers with a bargepole. They may play on the public promod TDM server occasionally, but they are normally found on the promod servers. Which the regular public player doesn't touch with a bargepole. Incidentally, when I play on the pub servers (and I am a fairly serious clan player), I play for fun and to hone my CoD4 skills, not to "pwn" as many people as possible (although that could be seen as "fun" by some players). As to the whole "n00b t00b" comment, I'd like to see verifiable evidence that the clan players are the first to call n00b t00b. In my experience on the servers, regular players call it JUST as often, if not more.

The point I'm trying to make here, is that we essentially apply matchmaking ourselves. We know which servers are good to play on, which ones have admins available, which ones apply rules to keep the playing field fair. We also want to be able to play with/against our friends on an open server occasionally. I don't want a program to dictate to me which server and which people I have to play with. The whole beauty of the dedicated server system is that you DO have the ability to pick and choose. The "Private Game" option on the match making service frankly cannot compare to joining an open server with your friends and having a jol against some randoms from across the country.

I'm not a fan of stuff like the Promod, either. But this is because I'm fundamentally opposed to organised competitive play. That's an entirely different discussion, however. I'll say, however, that it's my experience of clan / overly competitive mentalities that started putting me off PC online gaming in the first place.

It is indeed an entirely different discussion. You seem to imply that you are fundamentally opposed to all forms of sport, and quite possibly, to how business functions? Could be an interesting debate.

I won't disagree that there are many clans who have a very overcompetitive attitude. However, in my personal experience, all the clans I've joined have been ones where the players get together because they have similar likes and interests and frankly just want to have a jol together. The competitive aspect keeps the game interesting for us.

I can't agree with this at all. Playing with people who are much, much better than you = you getting killed constantly, and ultimately quitting out of frustration. There's definitely a threshold somewhere. Sure, playing with anyone a bit better than you is going to improve your game, but when you're massively outmatched, you don't really learn anything at all. Matchmaking typically looks at a range of ranks, rather than specifically matching a player with people of exactly the same rank. I think that, as a rank 10 player, for example, being matched with rank 8-15 players is just about right.

My personal experience says it does. I started online gaming with a game that has one of the steepest learning curves I've ever experienced - Day of Defeat. When I joined, the community had been together for about two years (so where CoD4 is at right now), and obviously there were many many very experienced players. In fact, because it was such a small community, virtually all the players were highly experienced. The first six months of that game, I got nailed so badly. 0.5kd or worse was the norm. After 6 months, I started hitting my first consistently positives KDs. The really tough learning curve just made it that much more satisfying to "master" the game. Personally, I suspect your attitude towards this links back with your previous comments about organised competitive gameplay. There is an inherent challenge in both the organised competitive play, and in what I've described above. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that if you are not prepared to accept the challenge in the former, you will be unlikely to accept the challenge of the latter.

Oh, and in the 20 minutes of playing against the MSI.fnatic team at rAge (2v2) I would definitely wager that I learnt more about CPMA/Q3 than all my previous lan experience against very similarly (to me) skilled players. And yes, I did get COMPLETELY raped by them. 160-20, with 15 kills coming from my teamie. Perhaps we'll have to agree to disagree on this.

I know. I was referring specifically to Maplassie's comments about hosting friends on his line. A 4mb line won't hold any more than 10 players without becoming unstable (it's the same on Xbox, y'know ).

The reason I was pointing it out, specifically, is that the data throughput on the computer version of CoD4 is substantially higher than on XBox. This would have a material effect on Private Matches on the PC version.

Bowler also said something about not being sure of the technicalities. I have gazed deep into my crystal ball, and I predict IW doing some serious damage control in the next day or so.

I'm not sure why LAN play should be affected. Doesn't Steam allow offline LAN play?

Damage control indeed. If there are no dedicated servers, and a requirement that you be connected to the internet to join a game (which Bowler strongly implies here: "You're completely reliant on IWNet and there is no dedicated server or server list. You rely on IW Net for matchmaking and your games, but you still have your private matches.") ala SC2, then lan play will frankly fail in SA.

Not quite, no. It couldn't be, unless they were relying on individual (player) hosted servers, which would be kinda unprecedented. However, the principle is much the same - disallowing players from browsing server lists, and placing them instead.

You're suggesting that IW will host all the servers? Since there is no dedicated server software, iGame/SGS/IS/MWEB will be unable to host servers. Wanna try playing an online FPS with a 300+ ping?

I think people should wait out IW's side on this before making assumptions about anything. It's a somewhat bizarre move, I'll agree, but until they announce they're charging for online play, it's too soon to start shouting out Activision for being greedy corporate dogpigs. Not directed at you specifically, mind you, but the prevailing sentiment of discussions I'm seeing on the topic.

Making the price of a standard edition PC game R500? They're greedy corporate dogpigs. The collectors edition of DA:O comes with a huge amount of extra stuff, for just R100 more than MW2...

I am eager to see what IW has to say on the matter, but based on what I have read and heard (and this is frankly more than a mere rumour, Bowling is a rather reliable source...) I have cancelled my pre-order for MW2. Will use the money on Borderlands so long.

 

[Maplassie]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FKty5Kpf4w

 

[Azimuth]

You've basically proven the first part of my earlier post. The TF2 community is fundamentally different from the CoD4 community, from both the player and the admin perspective. Understand that I play and admin the iGame CoD4 servers, which are very different to the SGS ones, in turn (we have admins on regularly). Believe me when I say that the admin team on iGame doesn't allow stacking on the servers. Its actually one of my pet hates, and I have kicked/banned clan members for stacking and ignoring my warnings to even the teams.

As for playing for "serious business", sure, there are a few clans who do that. Those clans, however, don't touch the public TDM/S&D/Sabotage/Whatever servers with a bargepole. They may play on the public promod TDM server occasionally, but they are normally found on the promod servers. Which the regular public player doesn't touch with a bargepole. Incidentally, when I play on the pub servers (and I am a fairly serious clan player), I play for fun and to hone my CoD4 skills, not to "pwn" as many people as possible (although that could be seen as "fun" by some players). As to the whole "n00b t00b" comment, I'd like to see verifiable evidence that the clan players are the first to call n00b t00b. In my experience on the servers, regular players call it JUST as often, if not more.

The point I'm trying to make here, is that we essentially apply matchmaking ourselves. We know which servers are good to play on, which ones have admins available, which ones apply rules to keep the playing field fair. We also want to be able to play with/against our friends on an open server occasionally. I don't want a program to dictate to me which server and which people I have to play with. The whole beauty of the dedicated server system is that you DO have the ability to pick and choose. The "Private Game" option on the match making service frankly cannot compare to joining an open server with your friends and having a jol against some randoms from across the country.

Okay, you make an excellent argument here. And good to hear you guys foster a friendlier playing environment over on iGame - you should consider running a few TF2 servers.

Oh, and in the 20 minutes of playing against the MSI.fnatic team at rAge (2v2) I would definitely wager that I learnt more about CPMA/Q3 than all my previous lan experience against very similarly (to me) skilled players. And yes, I did get COMPLETELY raped by them. 160-20, with 15 kills coming from my teamie. Perhaps we'll have to agree to disagree on this.

I think so. My own experience of this is that, if I'm getting slaughtered, I'll find something else to play. Perhaps this is the difference between people who play for a bit of fun, and people who play competitively - people who play for a bit of fun just aren't that driven to improve that they'll spend six months getting their arses kicked. And I think a lot of people fall into this category.

You're suggesting that IW will host all the servers? Since there is no dedicated server software, iGame/SGS/IS/MWEB will be unable to host servers. Wanna try playing an online FPS with a 300+ ping?

I'm not suggesting anything, I'm speculating. Which is really all anyone's doing right now (although I haven't checked my RSS feeds yet... ). And yes, I agree, that would be kinda crippling for local players.

Making the price of a standard edition PC game R500? They're greedy corporate dogpigs. The collectors edition of DA:O comes with a huge amount of extra stuff, for just R100 more than MW2...

Of course, one might argue that PC games have been at around R300 for the last five years or so, while the cost of everything else (including game development) has skyrocketed. Also, the price difference isn't quite so significant overseas - so shout at Megarom instead.

 

[OmegaFenix]

Azi what Orbboi said is true. I played on with Mappy and some of the other much more experienced players and my skill went up alot. If you just play against the same skilled players your never going to learn neat new tricks that the clannies teach you. I can personally vouch for at least 2 or 3 members of CRAK as i have played against them and its still fun even though Mappy can head shot me while i run, jump & crawl all over. But then again i also got him a few good times.

/Ponders starting up COD4 again.

 

[Maplassie]

Azi what Orbboi said is true. I played on with Mappy and some of the other much more experienced players and my skill went up alot. If you just play against the same skilled players your never going to learn neat new tricks that the clannies teach you. I can personally vouch for at least 2 or 3 members of CRAK as i have played against them and its still fun even though Mappy can head shot me while i run, jump & crawl all over. But then again i also got him a few good times.

/Ponders starting up COD4 again.

Thanks for the Kind words dude.

Yeah look, to detract just a bit. I take my COD very seriously, but only in the sense of "improving" I love the game, but in my own defense, I'm not one of those arrogant bastards that think they are good and call everybody names and moan and complain about stuff. I play it to have Fun.

I help the newbies get into the game, I give advice, I comment on good shots etc etc.

I got to where I am by playing strong players, watching and spectating them then adapting. If I had to allways play ppl with only my level of skill I would not really get very far.

And look as discussed earlier. Maybe they have something instore for us which is actually quite awesome, maybe we are up in arms to quick?

This is InfinityWard afterall, you guyz know they are legend for a reason....

But yeah.... Dunno...... very confused.

 

[Dragonic]

Yeah IW is legend... they were one of the last sane companies around...

 

[Kyubi_ZA]

Read this thread on Mybb please:

http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=197938



Edit: just finish reading conversation with Green_orb and Azimuth. WoW

 

[Avatar]

That was the most mature debate I've ever seen on the internet.. Kudo's to Azi and GOrb!

I have a feeling they'll get dedicated servers in there, but I'll wait and see on this one.

 

[Subversion]

+1 to everything green orb said, couldn't have said so better myself.

i think everyone here is just sad that the cod4 community cant move on to bigger and better things, its a kickass community and we all have a lot of fun playing together.

but wateva guys, we'll just keep doing our thing on MW1

 

[Isengard]

+ another 1 to GreenOrb. You reflect most of my sentiments exactly regarding the matchmaking scandal. I hope that IW take a proper look at the reactions and decide to make the necessary changes to get the PC gaming communities trust back. Why tarnish such a great reputation over something like this?