MW2: No Dedicated Servers, No Mods


Recommended Posts

Aha, seriously, get over it. It's worked on consoles and everyone will be getting the same content for the same price (if not cheaper on the PC). I know the PC version is missing a lot of features that were in previous games, but seriously.

http://www.tek-9.org/news/mw2_developer_ch..._news-2115.html

They've taken Lean out of the PC version, as well as the console, and the ability to change your Field of View.

Infinity Ward has ****ed this game for PC.

nor the option to kick players out of ranked matches

lolwut?

There goes the weak ass defence the console tards threw at the PC owners of "you don't need admins/mods, votekick is betterz!!1111".

Now you get stuck playing with the constant stream of matchmaking tards.

Since we can not kick people in ranked matches, how will we stop hackers who get past VAC?

Mackey-IW: Our goal is to ban hackers from the game.

Note to Infinity Ward, VAC might be good but there's always a stream of VAC proof hacks, so this new anti-hacking method is fail, it's worse off than any of the Half Life games/mods.

Will you buy COD MW2 for PC?

Let this be your guide:

2uf7sro.jpg

2d0l1xy.gif

You said IWnet was created to help stop piracy, what do you say about the Xbox 360 version leaked and shared on torrent sites?

Vince-IW: IWnet was designed to make the MP experience on PC easier and more balanced.

:laugh: :rofl:

Aha, seriously, get over it. It's worked on consoles and everyone will be getting the same content for the same price (if not cheaper on the PC). I know the PC version is missing a lot of features that were in previous games, but seriously.

Did you even read the chart there? Most of the good features that CoD4 had have now been removed, this means that essentially we're getting a console port except with "Graphics Options, Text Chat and Mouse and Keyboard Functionality" as quoted from that interview.

I was alright with the no ded severs business, but this is getting ridiculous. I think I've decided to save my money now, for certain. I'll just play it with those who do decide to buy it for console.

Why should we just 'get over it' they are giving us a game that has all the online features cut out and a game which is shorter than CoD4 but which costs more???

Sick of getting ****ty console ports.

Is there a gun pointed at your head? If this game is so ****ty then get another one, there's a lot to choose from.

Is there a gun pointed at your head? If this game is so ****ty then get another one, there's a lot to choose from.

Ricardo's right guyz, calm down

Ignoring IW.net, is the PC version a direct port of the console version?

Mackey-IW: No, PC has custom stuff like mouse control, text chat in game, and graphics settings.

OMG @ THOSE FEATURES.

MOUSE, KEYBOARD AND GRAPHICS CONTROL ON A PC? THIS IS 2009.

Is there a gun pointed at your head? If this game is so ****ty then get another one, there's a lot to choose from.

So people shouldn't be ****ed/complain about this ?

I don't get people that complain about people that complain ! Do they make you uncomfortable ? Let them whine, they obviously LIKE the game and the company that makes it are ****ing them over, so they have the right to complain.

You see, I'm torn whether or not to buy it, one side is saying 'It'll be fun, it's a great game on the inside" while the other side is saying "Don't buy it, have you seen how broken the PC version is?"

Gah.

Also, interesting comment on Kotaku:

Everybody's ragging on IW, when somehow I get the feeling they didn't have much to do with the recent retarded design decisions. Look at Blizzard cutting LAN from Starcraft 2 and releasing it over three disks. Look at them not even getting to it until AFTER whoring the **** out of World of Warcraft. Look at Guitar Hero being completely played out and beyond, spun off into Band Hero and DJ Hero (which, to be fair, I've heard good things about).

Who owns all of these companies/properties? Activision. I would wager that if we were able to talk to the developers without the big A over their shoulders, they'd be singing a different tune.

Hell, they're making Microsoft look like saints on the internet, and that takes some doing.

Edited by Chasethebase
Activision owns Blizzard ? Wow, that one needs some recent history lesson...

I guess this mistake of his makes his comment pretty much useless.

True, Vivendi (and hence Blizzard) acquired Activision but Kotick was an Activision man and he's in charge of Activision Blizzard.

Will you buy COD MW2 for PC?

Let this be your guide:

*snip*

One slight error/inaccuracy on that - LAN play - whilst it will be possible to play over a LAN, you still need an internet connection to get to the IW.net servers in the first place, so there's no offline LAN play.

seriously, im waiting for someone to hack the pc version and find a way to mod the game... it's gonna go against stuff like steam and VAC, but if it means mods for MW2, it sounds like its worth it...

Uhhh they'll ban your cd-key through steam which means you can't play, so no, won't be worth it.

Why all the fuss?

People into online gaming must have at least 512Kb/s upload rates. That's more than enough to host a match.

It's not like everyone's still using dial up :p

Well those of us in areas where bandwidth sucks (I am currently in Iraq) are not able to just jump online and play a game like this. Our internet speeds out here top out at 256kb, but you are talking about $190 a month for that speed....

We play COD:4 MW, but obviously we run our own local dedicated server. None of us plan to get MW:2.

Well those of us in areas where bandwidth sucks (I am currently in Iraq) are not able to just jump online and play a game like this. Our internet speeds out here top out at 256kb, but you are talking about $190 a month for that speed....

We play COD:4 MW, but obviously we run our own local dedicated server. None of us plan to get MW:2.

Wow.. that's seriously ****ed up.. 190 $ for that..

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Are you going to do performance benchmarks comparing all states? I'd be interested in seeing that in the next "part".
    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      rolfus earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      78
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!