[Official] Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2


Recommended Posts

Yes Mr. Kotick who himself said they wouldn't pursue franchises unless they could pump out new versions every year (literally)...

That's why Activision-Blizzard dropped sooooo many games when they merged. Kotick just didn't see "milking" opportunities. That's why we see a new CoD game every year, that's why PC players are getting shafted because Kotick doesn't care about PC players or the PC platform one bit.

Guys, I really hate to say this at is may destroy the great image if IW, but I have a feeling they had an equal part in this decision. I cannot help but think if it truly matteedr that much to them (dedicated servers), they really could have pushed for it to happen. Nowhere has it been confirmed yet it was Activisions decision solely, and I think there has not been anything said from IW yet since all of this because they know if they come out and say the truth people will think less of them, so they are sitting back and figuring out the best way to spin it all.

Guys, I really hate to say this at is may destroy the great image if IW, but I have a feeling they had an equal part in this decision. I cannot help but think if it truly matteedr that much to them (dedicated servers), they really could have pushed for it to happen. Nowhere has it been confirmed yet it was Activisions decision solely, and I think there has not been anything said from IW yet since all of this because they know if they come out and say the truth people will think less of them, so they are sitting back and figuring out the best way to spin it all.

i agree

Just posted this in the other thread as it seems two conversations are being had about the topic, but as I said a bit earlier I did not think Activision forced IW to do this, and I would say this confirms that statement.

Infinity War Has Made An Official Response

Predictably, nerds across world took to the Internet with a wailing and a gnashing of teeth that would make the Left 4 Dead community proud. An online petition to bring back dedicated servers at the time of this writing stands at 100,000+ signatures. However -- and this may shock some gamers with advanced persecution complexes -- this move was not made to tweak the noses of the PC community. Infinity Ward heads Jason West and Vince Zampella explain the decision as a conscious effort to improve their game for the vast majority of their players.

"We're just prioritizing the player experience above the modders and the tuners," says West. He points toward the mounting feedback IW has received from PC fans of Modern Warfare who couldn't find a decent server to play on between all of the cheaters, the insular communities, and huge skill level disparities that the original game's community fractured into. "We thought maybe it would be cool if the fans could play the game," he laughs.

IW says that gameplay concerns for the majority of MW2 players are the overriding reasons for the decision. Zampella downplays the obvious piracy prevention angle (IW has cited numbers of people online playing illegal copies of Modern Warfare up to 60 percent). "The Steam stuff helps with the piracy. I don't know that the matchmaking stuff does," he notes. West takes a shot at the motives behind some of the outrage, noting that there's money to made by selling dedicates servers and adspace on them: "It's a little dubious. Some of the people complaining are complaining with their pocketbook."

Again and again during our conversation, West and Zampella hammer the point that hardcore PC players lose very little to this change relative to the returns that casual to moderate fans will see. Clans can set up private matches to do their training or what have you; all they lose is the ability to customize the game on a deeper level with mods and such. Infinity Ward sees the addition of solid matchmaking and community support like IW-run tournaments to the PC as a huge win, and not something that could be done under the old system.

Why not have both? West does not want to include dedicated servers alongside the custom-built backend, stating that it would just "bifurcate the community."

http://gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/200...r-response.aspx

I bolded out the parts I thought were most interesting.

Just posted this in the other thread as it seems two conversations are being had about the topic, but as I said a bit earlier I did not think Activision forced IW to do this, and I would say this confirms that statement.

Infinity War Has Made An Official Response

http://gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/200...r-response.aspx

I bolded out the parts I thought were most interesting.

so if it worked before try something totally new, ******

well i guess i have to restart my MW2 saving up fund

No kidding right, the hardcore gamers built COD over the years just like we built Ubisoft's Rainbow Six, we've paid them to create us this content for years on end. Yet they continue to screw us in Xbox360 and PC games. Counter strike was a mod but mod's are only for hardcore gamers. WTF, You're telling the gaming community(your customers) their to f'ing stupid to understand a game with some more options and maturity. Maybe your management staff is the f'ing stupid ones, can they play the game? maybe you should have an advanced settings option just like a well programmed and mature game should. This isn't f'ing spongebob for your 6 year old!

I've been so ****ed off about how poorly 360 game options are. I want mods, dedicated server options and map editors on 360 too.

so if it worked before try something totally new, ******

well i guess i have to restart my MW2 saving up fund

It's just sad, as soon as Activision Merged with Blizzard, the first thing they do is do the same thing to MW2 that they did to WoW, worry more about the "casual gamer" than the hardcore player, who actually pays for the servers, etc. I know Activision, doesn't make money off of server hosting, etc, and as he said in the article, we are thinking more in our pocketbooks, than we are anything.. But you know what... screw them, more people will be cheating now because we all know VAC doesn't work worth a damn, and it will be worse for the casual player, because they will be on a server with those cheaters, with no "admins" to kick them or ban them from being on that server..

It just sucks. But yeah I agree IW is as much at fault for this as is Activision

There's more money in casual players than hardcore players, because casual players compose of much larger segment. So marketing 101, dummy edition tells you the casual segment is the preferred audience.

Not on the PC for a game of this scope there isn't, marketing 101, PC is fuelled largely by a hardcore audience, casual gamers tend to invest in a cheaper console as opposed to spending hundreds of $/? in a gaming PC.

The PC casuals play things like Popcap games and The Sims, not Call of Duty.

Casual gamers won't have a scooby what dedicated servers and everything else is, these changes won't make people flock to the PC MW2, it just annoys the buyers that were planning on buying.

I know Sethos, also the casual gamer is "cheaper" to develop for. Due to the fact that it takes them 2-3 times as long to go through all the current content, so they are content on not needing new content once a month like the hardcore gamer demands.

Wow thats a whole lot of contents.

But I agree with you Sethos, it just makes me mad as a hardcore gamer

Yeah but the Hardcore PC crowd can't keep up sales numbers, roughly 500k copies of MW sold on the PC? That is pathetic.

I probably added my last bit before you replied,

Casual gamers won't have a scooby what dedicated servers and everything else is, these changes won't make people flock to the PC MW2, it just annoys the buyers that were planning on buying.

You have a petition with over 100,000 signatures, if IW are worried about 500k in sales, that's 1/5th of the amount... To sell well on the PC you have to cater for your audience and go the extra mile, if there's a whiff of a cheap port/delays/content being cut or dumbed down, say goodbye to that precious audience that were going to legitimately buy and not download.

Edited by Audioboxer

Nothing will make people flock to the PC, so what's the point in pampering the PC crowd anymore. What was the latest "Official" number for sold copies of MW, 13 Million? So with 500k on the PC, that makes the last known official figure for console sit at 12,5 Million. That means PC gamers have no say, they have no influence and stop thinking they "built" the games because they bought them 8 years ago when PC was the only real viable platform.

I'm a hardcore PC gamer myself but I learned a long time ago to just settle in and stop fighting it.

PC gamers feel like they are entitled to something these days ...

I probably added my last bit before you replied,

You have a petition with over 100,000 signatures, if IW are worried about 500k in sales, that's 1/5th of the amount...

if they all paid the full amount that's 5 million dollars IW lost because they're being stupid

also can y'all keep the arguing to one thread

Nothing will make people flock to the PC, so what's the point in pampering the PC crowd anymore. What was the latest "Official" number for sold copies of MW, 13 Million? So with 500k on the PC, that makes the last known official figure for console sit at 12,5 Million. That means PC gamers have no say, they have no influence and stop thinking they "built" the games because they bought them 8 years ago when PC was the only real viable platform.

I'm a hardcore PC gamer myself but I learned a long time ago to just settle in and stop fighting it.

PC gamers feel like they are entitled to something these days ...

If that's the attitude why even make the game?

Cater to your audience and maximize the sales you can, or don't make the game at all.

You don't see Valve, Bioware, 2K, Bethesda, or any other respected PC devs come out with that BS, they do their hardest to make the best PC game they can for the audience and maximize their sales off the back of people on the PC who do still pay for quality titles and not just download.

MW2 is still based on the IW 4.0 engine that COD4 was made on, even with 1 million sales I'd say the PC version would easily still turn a nice profit. Chances are they'd of gotten even higher this time around though as MW2 comes out an even better game than COD4 - And from some of the console gamers opting to go with the PC instead of the overpriced console version.

If that's the attitude why even make the game?

Cater to your audience and maximize the sales you can, or don't make the game at all.

You don't see Valve, Bioware, 2K, or any other respected PC devs come out with that BS, they do their hardest to make the best PC game they can for the audience and maximize their sales off the back of people on the PC who do still pay for quality titles and not just download.

Because they can squeeze a bit of money and that's about it, piracy and stuck up PC gamers are killing the PC scene and the PC scene is like demanding a revolution of the ages each time a new game comes along, else it won't see any worthwhile sales numbers.

Consoles are the new bearing points in the gaming world, that's just how it is.

Because they can squeeze a bit of money and that's about it, piracy and stuck up PC gamers are killing the PC scene and the PC scene is like demanding a revolution of the ages each time a new game comes along, else it won't see any worthwhile sales numbers.

Consoles are the new bearing points in the gaming world, that's just how it is.

But then if they want to squeeze some money out of it what has the lax attitude to pleasing the PC gamers that will buy have to do with anything? That's just being dickish for no reason.

Cater to your audience, it's the simplest concept ever, but potentially the most lucrative. You can't drive decent PC sales nowadays ****ting on the people that are left that will actually give you their hard earned money, and not boot up uTorrent.

Nothing will make people flock to the PC, so what's the point in pampering the PC crowd anymore. What was the latest "Official" number for sold copies of MW, 13 Million? So with 500k on the PC, that makes the last known official figure for console sit at 12,5 Million. That means PC gamers have no say, they have no influence and stop thinking they "built" the games because they bought them 8 years ago when PC was the only real viable platform.

I'm a hardcore PC gamer myself but I learned a long time ago to just settle in and stop fighting it.

PC gamers feel like they are entitled to something these days ...

Where the hell is this 500k figure coming from?

I think he's talking bout Activision's CEO, Robert Kotwick

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kotick

his wiki article lol

Yes Mr. Kotick who himself said they wouldn't pursue franchises unless they could pump out new versions every year (literally)...

That's why Activision-Blizzard dropped sooooo many games when they merged. Kotick just didn't see "milking" opportunities. That's why we see a new CoD game every year, that's why PC players are getting shafted because Kotick doesn't care about PC players or the PC platform one bit.

I knew it. Incidentally I posted a thread regarding that $#@!bag last week, seeing if I had a unique perspective on him.

Apparently not.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Oh, I did. And it's even worse than I was hoping! Besides a lot of techno-babble jargon (yes I understand 100% of it but it's still all just techno-babble) there's 2 key points that make me super-weary about even considering testing this out. -- By default, after installation, a relay is automatically set up, so you do not need to care about that. * Non-chatmail apps use email servers as a long-term message archive while chatmail clients use email servers for ephemeral instant message relay. * Supporting the full variety of classic email setups would require considerable development and maintenance efforts, and complicate making chatmail-based messaging more resilient, reliable and fast. -- Basically, the end-user device is the 'server' (relay) so there is NO ARCHIVING whatsoever because every message is necessarily ephemeral. Great for techno-paranoia (and for illicit activities preferring no tracks to cover) but terrible for everybody else. It's also ironically contradictory to engineering principles of redundancies besides the transport layers due to the explicit absence of any persistent storage. Instead of 'classic email address' retaining multi-GB messaging archives on its server, now every device must retain 100% of those storage demands. (Email messages were originally meant to be short correspondences, not the multi-MB attachments boondoggle that now exists with unlimited spam engines flooding every potential recipient.) Any device swap or reset (or loss) makes the entire message history go bye-bye forever... lest there's an off-device auto-archival "relay" mechanism that's really a separate server that holds onto all transported messages (an email server) that utilizes 'chatmail email address' identities (like an email server) and its own persistent storage archive (like an email server). But... this solution is hoping to exist alongside real-world email address identities (based on the email server relay pathway) but simply render messages in chat thread format in an ephemeral manner (with contents being encrypted, and messages auto-expiring) ... In the end, it's a chat app/experience for the Web3/P2P-at-all-costs zealots. (I have accts on all sorts of federated web3 services so I understand the technical and non-technical alike.) For any practical users, however, it's just another service to download/install, register, cross-share id cards/qr codes, but know that there's no history/archive whatsoever (by design) so no account/message recovery whatsoever... update the device, install a bummed update patch, or dare upgrade your device... all history, poof, gone. Ya gotta start everything over again like they're a brand new person.
    • You've tried DuckDuckGo and Brave Search, now get serious with SearXNG by Paul Hill Over the last decade, it has become quite trendy to dump Google Search in favor of privacy-preserving alternatives such as DuckDuckGo, Startpage, and Brave Search. These search engines have done a very good job at highlighting dodgy practices by Google, such as adjusting search results based on what it thinks you’ll like (filter bubble) and stalking you around the web to advertise to you. While these search engines are good starting points when compared to non-private services like Google, there are still quite a few issues with them. For example, both DuckDuckGo and Brave Search require running non-free JavaScript in your web browser, which is comparable to running proprietary software on your computer, meaning you can be sure about what it’s actually doing in the background. Another issue is that these search engines are hosted on the respective companies’ servers, and you are using a service that you don’t control. Finally, DuckDuckGo, while offering privacy features, relies heavily on Microsoft’s infrastructure for its results and, in the past, has permitted Microsoft tracking scripts. If you are looking for a more private search solution than DuckDuckGo, Brave Search, and Startpage, then I recommend taking a look at SearXNG. It is a privacy-respecting metasearch engine that can be used via different public instances, which is useful for mobile users, or you can install it on your computer or server and run it locally with maximum control. Unlike Google, Bing, or Brave Search, which crawl the web and have their own search indexes, SearXNG is a metasearch engine, meaning it taps other search engines, stripping your identifying data, such as IP address, user agent, and cookies, in the process. Your search query is sent to the other search engines you enable before aggregating the results. SearXNG has deployment flexibility. If you are a casual user or a mobile user and don’t want to run SearXNG locally, you can use a public instance that is hosted by someone else. The main problem with this is that you are putting trust in the maintainer of the instance regarding stuff like logs that they may keep; good hosts should have a privacy policy explaining their policies. If you are trying to use SearXNG, you can also install the software on your device and then head to 127.0.0.1:8080 in your browser and search from there. While you don’t have to worry about a third-party admin like the public instances, search engines could ultimately block your IP address if they frown on you pulling in their search results locally. If you want to run it locally, it’s a good idea to use proxies or VPNs to hide your actual IP. You don’t have to worry about this with a public instance, as search engines never see your IP address. The main privacy benefit of using SearXNG is that it isolates your identity from the underlying engines that it’s capable of searching, such as Google and Bing. These search engines will only see requests coming from a generic server, so they can’t profile you and create a bubble filter that influences what results you see. This also ensures that your search engine doesn’t turn into an echo chamber that prevents you from reading alternative points of view. As a free software project, you are allowed to inspect SearXNG to make sure there are no negative features bundled inside. This sets it apart from the privacy search engines mentioned earlier because you can’t check their source code. As a meta search engine, you are not restricted to getting results from one source. Due to the fact that it scrapes content from other websites, your SearXNG instance will periodically get blocked from different providers, so it’s good to select a range of sources as a backup. While enabling all of the services will give you great results, this can make searching slower. I am personally happy with slower searches for the best results, but you can always check which providers are slowing down your search from the search results page and disable them to speed things up. If you want decent results quickly, enable the main search providers such as Google, Brave, DuckDuckGo, Qwant, Bing, and Yahoo. This way, you get wide coverage without the latency. On the Engines tab in Preferences, do note that there are different tabs, such as General, Images, and Videos, with their own providers that can be toggled and are not covered by "Enable all" while on the General tab, so be sure to dig into each. Just a note, if you want to enable everything, press "Enable all" in one tab, then hit save at the bottom of the page, then do the next tab, and so on. If you press "Enable all", then do that in each tab, and then save, nothing will stick. When I had just some of the search engines enabled, I searched “define nefarious” and results came back with the definition of “define” - obviously that was a sucky result. However, when I had everything enabled, it found dictionary pages for the word “nefarious” and even had an inline definition on the sidebar, which is quite nice too - that was delivered by WolframAlpha for anyone wondering! Probably the worst thing about this meta search engine is that the engines you select are saved with a cookie, so you must enable them on every new device you use SearXNG on, including if you decide to go into incognito mode with your web browser. Honestly, I would say this is the most annoying aspect, and perhaps if your browser lets you choose a separate private browsing search engine, then it would be best to use DuckDuckGo for this portion of your browsing. Another weakness of SearXNG is the random blocking of it by search providers. When you are on the results page, expand the “Response time” box, and it will show things like “Suspended: too many requests” or “access denied”. This is why it is good to enable several providers so that there is always a fallback to get results from. I won’t pretend SearXNG will be for everyone, however, if you enable all of the providers and put up with the slower response time, the results can be really amazing. Even if you don’t want to use it as your daily driver, keeping a bookmark handy that links to it is a good idea if you ever feel like doing a deep dive into a niche topic where other search engines are just failing to bring up any good result, due to the amount of sources it looks on. If you’re interested in radical user control over the software you use, installing SearXNG locally can also be a good idea, but be prepared to be temporarily blocked from sites if you trigger bot sensors without a VPN. Personally, I’ve opted to use a public instance, rather than install it myself. If you want to use it via a public instance, head over to searx.space to find a provider. Let us know in the comments if you have used SearXNG or its predecessor, Searx. What do you think about the quality of the results?
    • Dear Neowin, If it is not too much trouble, can you start using the new-ish designations for Insider Preview? "Experimental" is different than "former Dev" as it can apply to different models, eg 26H1 or 26H2 etc, right? No need to seed confusion IMHO. And, please "finally" update your graphics. OK?
    • Did you see their FAQ, its quite good. Have a look in the Advanced section. https://delta.chat/en/help
    • Just install Linux Mint that is a real blessing and many times cheaper because you can continue using your old Windows computer/laptop with the latest Linux updates.
  • Recent Achievements

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

    1. 1
      +primortal
      502
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      226
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      158
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!