[Official] Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2


Recommended Posts

Great to see some people understand the positive side about this change. I've said it time and time again, the PC version of Call of Duty 4 was ruined by the community and how 'all over the place' the entire experience felt. Each and every server had a different rule-set, despite applying various filters you could never avoid these massively customized servers. Then some guy felt a few perks should be restricted, then he felt certain weapons shouldn't be allowed on the server, then you had a player-count 300% above the actual comfortable limit of the map, then the host had to change core settings and worst of all, you had a player who always suffered from god-complex, kicking and banning everyone he disagreed with.

oh I totally agree with you on that, it frustrated the heck out of me when certain servers would ban X gun, or X perk because they felt it was "overpowered", which in practise usually just meant the admins of the servers couldn't counteract it properly.

But on the flip side, I enjoy playing on certain servers with certain communities. For example in TF2, I often visit a server that has a wide variety of custom user maps on rotation, or some days I might just feel like playing 2fort, so I visit a 24/7 2fort server. I don't experience annoying "host ended game" either (Although of course, they say they've solved this in MW2, but you will still have a brief migration period)

All of that would be taken away if Valve made TF2 or future games act like MW2 will do.

I just don't see why there can't just be a happy medium between the two, i.e have a matchmaking service that acts in the same way the console version does, yet also have dedicated servers and SDK's for those that want one, or keep it as it is in COD4, but isolate those servers that modify the rules (I believe TF2 does this)

You might like/love it but removing it entirely is going to upset a ton of longterm PC gamers who deliberately play on PC because it's the way it is. I own both PS3 COD5 and PC for this reason.

The cynic in me also suggests that they will just use this as a way of ramming paid map packs down our throats every so often like the console versions have, although I'm sure you could argue they have no incentive to do so otherwise.

oh I totally agree with you on that, it frustrated the heck out of me when certain servers would ban X gun, or X perk because they felt it was "overpowered", which in practise usually just meant the admins of the servers couldn't counteract it properly.

But on the flip side, I enjoy playing on certain servers with certain communities. For example in TF2, I often visit a server that has a wide variety of custom user maps on rotation, or some days I might just feel like playing 2fort, so I visit a 24/7 2fort server. I don't experience annoying "host ended game" either (Although of course, they say they've solved this in MW2, but you will still have a brief migration period)

All of that would be taken away if Valve made TF2 or future games act like MW2 will do.

I just don't see why there can't just be a happy medium between the two, i.e have a matchmaking service that acts in the same way the console version does, yet also have dedicated servers and SDK's for those that want one, or keep it as it is in COD4, but isolate those servers that modify the rules (I believe TF2 does this)

You might like/love it but removing it entirely is going to upset a ton of longterm PC gamers who deliberately play on PC because it's the way it is. I own both PS3 COD5 and PC for this reason.

The cynic in me also suggests that they will just use this as a way of ramming paid map packs down our throats every so often like the console versions have, although I'm sure you could argue they have no incentive to do so otherwise.

And this, is why I like the other, usual version of PC gaming. You can revisit the same server, with the same community, and have a great time. With a specific map as well.

Damn this is arkward...

Also, Paid Map Packs wouldn't work because surely the map files will just be put online for the pirates to download?

And this, is why I like the other, usual version of PC gaming. You can revisit the same server, with the same community, and have a great time. With a specific map as well.

Damn this is arkward...

Also, Paid Map Packs wouldn't work because surely the map files will just be put online for the pirates to download?

You could say that again, 170 hours on the same server :laugh: - http://www.gametracker.com/server/85.236.1...yer/Audioboxer/

As for pirating the maps, if it's secured through steam, doubt it.

You could say that again, 170 hours on the same server :laugh: - http://www.gametracker.com/server/85.236.1...yer/Audioboxer/

As for pirating the maps, if it's secured through steam, doubt it.

Oh it uses Steam? I like it even more. Steam means it'll run VAC too right?

Great to see some people understand the positive side about this change. I've said it time and time again, the PC version of Call of Duty 4 was ruined by the community and how 'all over the place' the entire experience felt. Each and every server had a different rule-set, despite applying various filters you could never avoid these massively customized servers. Then some guy felt a few perks should be restricted, then he felt certain weapons shouldn't be allowed on the server, then you had a player-count 300% above the actual comfortable limit of the map, then the host had to change core settings and worst of all, you had a player who always suffered from god-complex, kicking and banning everyone he disagreed with.

Players should not be allowed to have this kind of control at all, it has been the Achilles' heel of "server browser" games for ages, plus the worst of all, most hosts have no idea how terrible their connections or computers were - So despite the server browser reporting green connection, the lag could be horrendous due to terrible internet connections - At least matchmaking 'pings' the host before choosing and actually selects the best host available almost every time.

Matchmaking provides for standardized settings EACH AND EVERY TIME! Select your game-mode and you are 100% sure you won't get thrown in some terrible, messed up game. By creating a more closed environment it's easier to leave pirates in the cold and get rid of cheaters the first time around.

you are picking the worst examples of privately-run servers just to prove a point...

i can only agree with the 'all over the place' line if a particular game doesnt have a working filter system for the server browser...and that 'archilles heel' you are talking about only really applies to games with an utterly broken server browser, which is basically what nobody likes to play anyway... plus, pc games dont report the connection in colours, it reports in milisecond pings...

and about matchmaking... its strictly a 'jump right in' feature, and to think that they have erased all our other options just for this... what happened to clans having their password protected servers , geographically located where every member can get a good ping?

I can agree with the fact you'd like some "custom" servers once and awhile, based on custom maps or perhaps some sort of modification, that is sad to lose but again, you have to look at what you gain as well. One thing I 'forgot' was leaderboards. I mean, it's not important but I'd say most people were lying if they didn't enjoy checking out their global standing, K&D ratios, kills, scores etc. and with a closed matchmaking system that is possible! Means you can see every kill you ever made and not just based on one server - I personally like that.

Having both systems, the old "server browser" system and the new one is not a good idea, first off it kills most of the great features the more closed matchmaking system offers plus it kills the point of matchmaking. By removing players from the matchmaking system you are effectively increasing search times and removing the efficiency of the matchmaking system. It HAS to be one or the other, it can't be both without destroying one of the systems.

Honestly, I think if most people tried to see the great features a closed system had to offer, there wouldn't be so much damn crying. It's a radical change and that is the sole reason why a lot of people are rebelling at this point - I don't blame you but at least have en open mind about it.

carmatic: No I'm not, I'm picking the experience I had from playing Call of Duty 4 on the PC for a few weeks, it took AGES to find a public server with somewhat standardized settings. EVERY server is different, every server is a complete change from the other - It's horrible.

you could say im close minded, but imposing thieir no-server multiplayer system on PC gaming is like clearing out a lush jungle to make way for a plantation... a whole ecosystem is gone, just so they can make more money

if people want a nice and controlled atmosphere, maybe they should stick to consoles, they are like pleasant parks and gardens , compared to the wilderness where FPS gaming came from in the first place

The non-dedicated server issue on PC is horrible. I hope IW realizes that PC gamers playing MW2 are a fraction of the number of PS3 or X360 players. This means there are much fewer PC players in a given area than console gamers, therefore added distance between the host and players, and increased lag.

I know they added this feature to combat piracy, but seriously, this is at the expense of sales and enjoyment factor. I won't be buying this unless I'm sure it will be playable.

Anybody know proper PC System requirements for this game, googling gives me vague results.

Thanks, both ran pretty well so this one should run as well.

And I am not fan of multi-player as well, I never really was comfortable with it, am better off with SP. So am never gonna miss that side of the game. :)

DICE Makes Hay With Dedicated Server Controversy

Earlier this morning, the executive producer for the Battlefield franchise tweaked Call of Duty over Infinity Ward ending dedicated server support, "confirming" that, yes, dedicated server support is "a given" in Battlefield titles on the PC. "Dedicated servers FTW. What ever secures a better online experience is a given for us," Tweeted DICE's K.M. Troedsson.

KM Troedsson (L_Twin) on Twitter [thanks Cirap]

:laugh: Activison you can screw off.

That tweet (

from L_Twin) was great. It was a pretty subtle dig at Infinity Ward (he didn't mention IW or Modern Warfare), and honestly, IW deserves all of the heat that is getting thrown at them for removing dedicated servers. Regardless of what Bowling said in the podcast about the possibility of IWnet evolving over time, I think we all know that is never going to happen. The system will never be anything more than a misguided attempt at mimicking a multiplayer system that is already inferior to server lists and dedicated servers.
DICE Makes Hay With Dedicated Server Controversy

:laugh: Activison you can screw off.

I dunno - is he talking Battlefield 2 and that series - or the gimped console series?

The console series is just the same matchmaking bull**** if I recall? :s

I think people are ****ed because by taking away dedicated servers you take away servers you become a regular player on.

You take away becoming internet-friendz because you only meet them once in matchmaking :/

Battlefield series on consoles may have dedicated servers but its still matchmaking so it makes no difference really :p

I see how dedicated servers are needed with 64player games but COD is only...what 16?

i cant believe the pc crowd are going to have to use this match making crap.

i can see how it makes things easier on consoles, but im sick of being dumped off in matches full of idiots, there being no servers, or it being too laggy.

id rather just find a server i like, and become a regular.

definatly just lowered the chance of me buying this now.

I dunno - is he talking Battlefield 2 and that series - or the gimped console series?

The console series is just the same matchmaking bull**** if I recall? :s

I think people are ****ed because by taking away dedicated servers you take away servers you become a regular player on.

You take away becoming internet-friendz because you only meet them once in matchmaking :/

Battlefield series on consoles may have dedicated servers but its still matchmaking so it makes no difference really :p

I see how dedicated servers are needed with 64player games but COD is only...what 16?

I believe he was talking about the BF series on the PC, not including BF:Heroes. Like BF2 and BF2142.

I dunno - is he talking Battlefield 2 and that series - or the gimped console series?

The console series is just the same matchmaking bull**** if I recall? :s

Bad Company 2 is coming to PC, which is what he is talking about.

I think people are ****ed because by taking away dedicated servers you take away servers you become a regular player on.

You take away becoming internet-friendz because you only meet them once in matchmaking :/

You can "party up" with others or create private matches.

Just to be clear, and someone asked this earlier in the thread.

The PC version does NOT have LAN support either. So, no Hamachi won't get more popular with the PC crowd with MW2. In fact, it won't work at all. Isn't that great?

Just to be clear, and someone asked this earlier in the thread.

The PC version does NOT have LAN support either. So, no Hamachi won't get more popular with the PC crowd with MW2. In fact, it won't work at all. Isn't that great?

Err, WHAT.

Well, that kinda sucks. Screw them. Got a link for that?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • A different thing with Russia. When you say is it better, depends on things. It is better that we don't have the E.U making rules and laws that have nothing to do with them. Is the trading part better? No, that is really mucked up, but then we knew that was going to happen and we would have make agreements, like we do with other parts of the world. Freedom of movement is certainly better, but could be improved, we still need more control over our borders. do you live in the U.K?
    • So what am I quoting from them? I never listened to what Farage or his cronies said. I wanted the U.K to leave the E.u years before the referendum and it had nothing to do with Farage and his cronies. So what country do you live in? Did we work much better together? We were always at logger heads with the E.U because we disagreed with them so much. Maggie was always on at them. I would have thought the E.U was glad to get rid of us as we stopped the integration or made it a two tier. Now without us they can integrate more. I would not have voted out if it was just a trading block and we can still work together on somethings.
    • MPC-BE 1.9.0 by Razvan Serea Media Player Classic - BE is a free and open source audio and video player for Windows. Media Player Classic - BE is based on the original "Media Player Classic" project (Gabest) and "Media Player Classic Home Cinema" project (Casimir666), contains additional features and bug fixes. The BE mod (Black Edition Mod) is a skinned version of Media Player Classic Home Cinema, much better looking than the plain old MPC. MPC-BE 1.9.0 changelog: Splitters Fixed crashes in some situations. AudioSplitter Added support for the RF64 format. Fixed reading of channel layout for some WavPack files. Added support for ID3 tags for Wave64 files. Unknown Wave64 chunks are now ignored. AviSplitter Added support for 'y408' video. Improved support for 'HEVC' video. FLVSplitter Added support for VVC video. MP4Splitter Improved handling of corrupted files. MatroskaSplitter Expanded support for V_UNCOMPRESSED video codecs. Fixed support for frame rotation (ProjectionPoseRoll). Improved support for "V_MS/VFW/FOURCC / HEVC". MpcDvdVideoDecoder Fixed conversion to YUY2. Fixed display of menus for some DVD-Videos. RoQVideoDecoder Output in NV12 and YV12 formats is allowed. Full range is used. MPC Video Decoder RGB32 format will be output as a top-down bitmap by default. Added support for the "IID_MediaSideDataDOVIMetadataV2" interface. Removed support for the deprecated "IID_MediaSideDataDOVIMetadata" interface. Fixed retrieving the name of the video adapter when using NVDEC. Fixed crashes in some situations. MPC Video Converter Added support for AYUV video format. MpcAudioRenderer Improved input format validation. Optimized retrieval of supported formats for exclusive mode. Added the "Keep audio device active when paused" setting. Fixed crashes and freezes in various situations. Subtitles Added the ability to open the properties of an external subtitle renderer in the "Subtitles" settings panel. Fixed external subtitle connections for VSFilter. Fixed a crash when rendering PGS/SUP subtitles when using AVX2. YouTube Improved support for yt-dlp. The built-in YouTube parser is no longer used. Player The HTTP read strategy has been changed. If the playlist contains one entry, more key combinations can be used to control the player (jump through chapters, adjust volume). Improved support for reading ASX playlists. The translation of the MediaInfo report for Chinese, Korean and Japanese has been removed. Added blocking of 32-bit filter "PICVideo Lossless JPEG Decompressor" (pvljpg20.dll), because it crashes. Added blocking of the system filter "AVI Decompressor", which will eliminate the crash of VFW codecs. Fixed a rare crash when using the "/slave" key. Fixed a crash when getting a list of fonts for OSD. Added the ability to load an external audio file using hotkeys. Fixed opening a network path starting with \?\UNC. The "Determine duration when adding" playlist setting now works for YouTube video URLs. The "Online media services" settings panel has been redesigned. Added a "Merge files using FFmpeg" option to the file saving dialog. This option is activated when playing multiple streams obtained using yt-dlp. Added loading of local .dpl playlists ("DAUMPLAYLIST"). Fixed a hang when the user closes the player during the URL opening process. Various interface fixes. Installer Updated MPC Video Renderer 0.10.5. Updated MPC Script Source 0.2.17. Added MPC Image Source 0.3.6. Translations Updated Japanese translation (by tsubasanouta). Updated Chinese (Traditional) and Dutch translation (by beter). Updated Romanian translation (by Andrei Miloiu). Updated Hungarian translation (by mickey). Updated Turkish translation (by cmhrky). Updated German translation (by Klaus1189). Updated Chinese (Simplified) translation (by wushantao). Updated Italian translation (by mapi68). Updated Korean translation (by Hackjjang). Updated Chinese (Traditional) (by udfbe). Updated libraries dav1d 1.5.3-6-g04b69f9; ffmpeg n8.2-dev-1857-g4653e68aab; libpng git-v1.6.55-9-g7d52a8087; Little-CMS git-lcms2.18-26-gf739cda; MediaInfo git-v26.05-38-g702c9b7fd; ZenLib git-v0.4.41-91-g073f297; zlib 1.3.2. Download: MPC-BE 64-bit | Portable MPC-BE 64-bit | ~20.0 MB (Open Source) Download: MPC-BE 32-bit | Portable MPC-BE 32-bit Link: Media Player Classic - BE Home Page Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Apple reportedly looks to blacklisted Chinese memory chips as RAM prices climb by Karthik Mudaliar Image via Apple Apple is reportedly trying to get a clearance from the Trump administration to buy memory from ChangXin Memory Technologies (CXMT) to get some relief from soaring DRAM prices. As per a report by the Financial Times, Apple approached the Commerce Department more than a month ago and also spoke to other officials and allies in Washington. For starters, CXMT is a company that's already been placed on the Pentagon's list of Chinese military companies. The Chinese company is the country's top DRAM maker. For Apple, the timing is certainly awkward but not surprising. Tim Cook had recently warned that Apple would have to raise prices because AI companies are buying up large amounts of memory for data centers, and just like that, Apple raised MacBook and iPad prices. Micron also recently revealed that customers have committed billions of dollars to secure memory supply years in advance, which shows us how aggressive securing infrastructure has become. This gives suppliers such as Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron more leverage, while pushing hardware makers to look for alternatives. CXMT is one of those alternatives, but not the simplest one. Apple has spent many years trying to diversify parts of its supply chain away from China, especially for final assembly, while still depending heavily on Chinese manufacturing and suppliers. Even domestic brands from China are moving towards CXMT and YMTC instead of relying on Samsung, Micron, and SK Hynix. For Apple, though, it would invite more scrutiny than local Chinese companies. For now, this is more like a lobbying effort rather than a confirmed supply deal. There's no official statement from either of the parties. What is clearer, though, is the pressure behind such a request. AI demand has certainly made hardware a bottleneck, and companies are trying everything they can to bring things back to normal, even if that means making politically sensitive choices. Source: Financial Times
    • I did test it a month or so back, but ... the results I expect to be on the first page are not there.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      486
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      220
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!