Tech Comparison: Modern Warfare 2 PC

By Richard Leadbetter Published 16 November, 2009

Dedicated service.

Page 1 of 2

It's fair to say that the core PC gamer has a huge emotional investment in the Call of Duty and Modern Warfare series. The franchise (as it has now become) originated on computer and, at its core, it's still running id Software code that dates all the way back to the Quake 2 era. Indeed, even Modern Warfare 2's first splash screen acknowledges the contribution Carmack's antique code makes to the current game, just like its predecessors before it.

However, it's equally obvious that since the launch of Call of Duty 2 alongside Xbox 360 back in November 2005, the series has been moving towards a more mainstream focus, concentrating on the console audience and what those gamers want from a first-person shooter. The result has been enormous financial rewards for Activision and Infinity Ward. PC support continues, but it is estimated that of the original Modern Warfare's 13 million sales, only 10 per cent of those derive from the PC game.

The arrival of Modern Warfare 2 effectively divorces the PC version of the game from many of the accepted conventions that core fanbase expects from this style of game. We all know about the lack of dedicated server support, which I'll touch on later, but it's clear to see that Modern Warfare 2 is a cut above the usual console port. Perhaps most obviously there are multiple sets of textures you can choose between to get the game running on lower or higher-end hardware.

It's not often we see this anymore - there seems to be a tacit admission from publishers that their PC audience runs graphics cards that easily outperform the GPUs in the Xbox 360 and PS3, so they simply re-use the console assets. This means that those with low-power machines can't run the game very well at all, while the hardcore with high-end kit find themselves supremely over-specced.

However, Modern Warfare 2 has low, medium, high and "extra" texture levels that in theory open up the game to those with both lower-end and top-level GPUs:

'Tech Comparison: Modern Warfare 2 PC' Screenshot low
'Tech Comparison: Modern Warfare 2 PC' Screenshot normal
'Tech Comparison: Modern Warfare 2 PC' Screenshot high
'Tech Comparison: Modern Warfare 2 PC' Screenshot extra

Most console ports forgo multiple texture quality levels, but Modern Warfare 2 still includes this. On the 'extra' detail level, you get a 'better than console' look, although the extent of the difference is variable from scene to scene.

In terms of how that compares to the console builds of the game, the high-quality level is roughly approximate to the console builds, but what the "extra" gives you is very much context-dependent. There are clear examples that show how the PC version boasts considerable increases in texture detail, like in the shots below.

'Tech Comparison: Modern Warfare 2 PC' Screenshot 360
'Tech Comparison: Modern Warfare 2 PC' Screenshot pc

A straight comparison of a 720p scene on 360 and PC, showing the additional texture detail the computer version offers.

There are also many areas where we see higher resolution in alpha elements of the texture, although any actual detail increase appears slight. Having played through the game now on three separate SKUs, one thing that is quite apparent is that a couple of campaigns that simply don't match the overall standard of the others. The initial Ramirez levels set in US neighbourhoods are underwhelming in terms of gameplay and disappoint graphically too. Compare and contrast with any and all the SAS missions, which look incredible on console and scale up beautifully on the PC when running at higher resolutions. The resolution advantage of course is one of the key plus points of the computer version.

Slowed down to 30 per cent speed, here we see the 360 and PC builds of the game up against one another. Hit the full-screen button for full HD resolution, or else click the EGTV link for a larger window.

For the same Face-Off video remixed with the PS3 version up against the PC build, we've prepared a special alternative video. For more in-depth analysis of the console versions, look no further than last week's Face-Off. That article's comparison gallery has now been updated to include the PC version too.

While the console versions upscale 1024x600 with 2x multi-sampling anti-aliasing, the PC build offers the usual array of customisable resolutions, along with the ability to run with either 2x or 4x AA, or none at all if you don't have the requisite CPU power. Running Modern Warfare 2 on a Core i7 system running Windows 7 and a GTX295, I was able to run the game with everything at maximum at 1080p, albeit with some quite alarming drops in performance later on in the game.

German site PC Games Hardware has done a bang-up job of measuring performance with a vast array of GPUs to give some idea of how well your graphics card copes with the game generally. However, I found that having the v-sync option engaged seemed to introduce drops in performance that were occasionally very impactful. V-sync is pretty much an essential in my book, and it's worth pointing out that the console builds employ it too. It's a core part of the MW2 visual make-up.

Page 1 of 2

Comments (76) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • MrMud #1 2 years ago

    Of course its not a straight port. The PC version has graphics options and mouse support!

  • DDevil #2 2 years ago

    GRAPHICS OPTIONS!

    I don't know what you MW2 PC owners are moaning about. AND you get text chat - lets see the PS3 or 360 do that!

  • Zomoniac #3 2 years ago

    Here's hoping this is hacked to buggery, and the server/LAN version becomes the most pirated game in history. It's the first time ever I've wanted mass piracy to destroy a games company, but they brought it on themselves.

    As I say every single time there's a fancy new DRM or some kind of game-breaking piracy proof scheme is released; do not try and beat the hackers. You can't win. And the more you piss them off trying, the more they're going to come back and punish you harder for it. See PSP for the perfect example.

  • matrim83 #4 2 years ago

    Very good read. At least someone is wiling to acknowledge that the PC version is a shadow of what it could have been. Most websites are too happy to gloss over it.

  • Darren #5 2 years ago

    It's a fairly ordinary shooter from my experience of the PC version so far with the occasional excellent level that stands out but, in its favour, the engine runs beautifully smooth at 60 fps 99% of the time (with occasional drops as low as 45 fps, usually during a save point) at 1920x1200 with 4xAA, 16xAF (forced) and triple buffering enabled (forced; using D3DOverrider). Without triple buffering the framerate was more erratic so if you want a smoother experience then make sure to download RivaTuner and use D3DOverrider to force triple buffering.

    It's a nice enough looking game but it's no stunner IMO, certainly not on the PC anyway; the lighting doesn't look as impressive as other games for one (e.g. Crysis), probably because it's not using HDR lighting but a cheap bloom effect.

  • khaz #6 2 years ago

    [Rant]

    "Speaking from experience, trying to gain access as a newbie to what is essentially a very closed set-up in dedicated servers is a nightmare: insta-bans because you're not part of the club, or if your ping doesn't quite make the (arbitrary) standard is commonplace."

    While I won't disagree with this such servers/communities are not "commonplace". If you have been insta-banned from such servers is because you most probably violated the no matyrdom/laststand/noobtube rule which ARE quite commonplace and result in instabans. And you can hardly call that arbitrary, those three "perks" are by far the most disliked CoD4 elements in multiplayer and every server goes out of its way to clearly state that these are banned or not. Console messages and/or A BIG FAT MOTD AS THE GAME STARTS OR IN THE SERVER NAME ITSELF IN BIG CAPS LETTERS LIKE THIS is also common. Most servers in my experience as well go out of their way to tell players to stop using those perks and the noobtube.

    Rest of the article is fine and quite true. :)

    Oh well, if dedicated servers are ever patched back in, i'll get the game. I have no interest otherwise. And I give it 6 months tops before the multiplayer scene dies on the PC. P2P on a fps game on the PC simply does not work. If i'm proven wrong i'll get the game.

    On another epic IW LAWL note:

    0071EB98: 'set systemlink 0; set splitscreen 0; set onlinegame 1; exec default_xboxlive.cfg',0
    00787A50: 'Set to false to disable dx allocations (for dedicated server mode)',0
    00701580: 'Show dedicated servers only',0
    00702558: 'ui_browserShowDedicated',0

    Source: http://ba shandslash.com/boards/viewtopic... and [link url=http://www.infinityward.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2 4&t=170116
    ]http://ww w.infinityward.com/forum/viewto...[/link]

    Jesus, IW. Come on...

    I can appreciate IW wanting to maximise the profitibality of their game but shafting a whole section of gamers is just plain wrong. Especially when the shafting results in such an inferior online experience. It would be like removing xbox live play from the 360 version and making the game system link only. :/

    [/Rant]
    Edited by 1 at 16/11/09 @ 10:37

  • Colonel_Panic #7 2 years ago

    "Indeed, even Modern Warfare 2's first splash screen acknowledges the contribution Carmack's antique code makes to the current game, just like its predecessors before it. "

    Do you even know what id tech code it still uses? It's got nothing to do with it! And antique? Haha!

  • aidey6 #8 2 years ago

    @ svd_grasshopper; hmmm sounds like EDGE has dusted of their Super Mario Sunshine reviewer....

  • ps3owner #9 2 years ago

    is this Activision or IW who's trying to milk this? or both?!

    I guess the game will just fail on the PC.

  • ybfelix #10 2 years ago

    Consoles have gone a long way, too. I remember in 2005, average PS2 graphic compared to PC was far worse than this.

    @Colonel_Panic: So what do you know? Care to share?

  • Bagpuss #11 2 years ago

    Wait till they announce their first DLC for the PC that you have to pay for......

    The shit will really hit the fan then......'we told you so', 'money grabbing cocksuckers','corporate cunts','sell outs'....etc,etc.

    Infinity Ward are a dead developer to me now, not interested in any of their future products.

    Robert Bowling and the rest of his console kiddie devs at IW, are nothing but a bunch of lying mother fuckers.
    Edited by 1 at 16/11/09 @ 10:46

  • Darren #12 2 years ago

    Taken from khaz's links earlier:

    "0072A5CC: 'Amount to shift the player 3rd person model when leaning right',0"

    So lean was originally intended to be in the game then? I must admit the PC version of MW2, like F.E.A.R. 2 before it, does feel somewhat gimped with lean removed. Having to actually stand out in the open instead of being able to lean out of cover or a door frame feels completely stupid. Sure, it's understandable it's been omitted on the consoles where the number of buttons are a limiting factor but it makes no sense at all on the PC, especially as you'll only ever be playing against other PC gamers anyway not console gamers. So why was the lean function removed?

    As a PC gamer I'm getting fed up of these "dumbed down" console ports. It only takes a little bit of extra effort to give PC gamers something extra which they'd take for granted anyway such as in-game graphics options (not aimed at MW2 but how many PC games omit basic things like V-Sync for example?) and extra control options such as lean in FPSs. Dragon Age: Origins might not be that different to the console versions but the interface improvements and extra camera options make this game a joy to play on the PC. It's a shame IW didn't put that same level of commitment into MW2 that BioWare have into DA:o; the multiplayer especially in MW2 seems quite a step down compared with earlier CoD games on the PC.
    Edited by 2 at 16/11/09 @ 11:01

  • jambo74 #13 2 years ago

    @Bagpuss

    Console games is where the money is at now. IW / Activision are a business who's job is to make money.

    All this cracking and alike just jusitfies their reason not to keep pandering to the PC user base.

    That and they buy less games at a cheaper price ot just rip a torrent.

    If you had a product that you could sell for more moneym to a dediacted user base, who would not try and crack it - who would you choose?
    Edited by 2 at 16/11/09 @ 10:51

  • khaz #14 2 years ago

    @Darren

    From what I can tell, all the features that were in CoD4 PC version were already present in MW2 (Its basically the same engine). They were either disabled or removed. In fact, just to prove this, the game has already been hacked on the PC to run on dedi servers, see here: http://www.teknogods. com/?p=179

    Actually, re-reading the article, this bit also annoys me somewhat: "Infinity Ward's apparent logic for setting up this system is in theory quite sound: the console community online is absolutely devoted to the game and it's not as if there are sustained moans from the userbase about the underlying tech - indeed Xbox Live users pay a premium for it."

    I'm sorry...whut? So the PC gamers who are still running servers for CoD4 (And CoD2), many of which are paid for from server rental companies means PC gamers aren't paying a premium? The article seems to clearly sidestep the issue that the PC community produced its own maps, its own mods, ran their own servers, their own leagues, their own websites, etc. etc. In fact, xbox live and PSN owe their current approach to multiplayer gaming by just taking everything PC gamers have been used to for the last decade. This is a good thing, infact. The more people online, the better. I bought a server for CoD4 last year for 3 months and it was one of the best gaming decisions of my life. That means I spent an actual 120 quid on the PC version of CoD4 and I enjoyed every single penny.


    Edited by 1 at 16/11/09 @ 11:05

  • Darren #15 2 years ago

    P.S. Although I don't generally play games online these days as I'm way too busy with single player campaigns, I have had a lot of experience with online gaming on the PC from the first two CoD games (first game plus its expansion pack) and generally I've had a smoother, lag-free experience, even with more than 16 players, than I have on either the Xbox/360 or PS3. The decision to abandon dedicated servers in favour of peer-2-peer therefore seems an odd choice on the PC, especially as it seems to have resulted in a lot less players and more cheating. 32+ players might not be ideal for all maps but, IMO, the more, the merrier which in turn equals more fun! Plus there was always user-made maps which added a lot of value to the multiplayer.

  • cianchristopher #16 2 years ago

    @Colonel_Panic:

    Yeah, the COD engine grew out of the Quake 3 code that dates back to 1999 - id tech 3.

    THe 1st COD game was built on a slightly modified version of this code - which was then substantially re-written for the sequel (Call of Duty 2) in 2005 - though it naturally contains elements of it.

    Again, this COD2 engine wsa modified substantially for COD4 in 2007 - and again less-so in 2009 for MW2.

    It's "antique" cos the code comes from the last century!

    Anyway, the game is pretty good (I like the campaign so far, but I know it's gonna be over soon) - the multiplayer on PC certainly is easier to get into for a noob, no doubt! But it's the fact that it'll be shut off eventually that really pisses me off!

  • Bagpuss #17 2 years ago

    @jambo74

    And of course we all know console owners are a bunch of saints not interested in ripping off the games companies....thats why microsoft just banned the best part of 1 million consoles...

    Hmmm.

  • aldo_14 #18 2 years ago

    Actually, re-reading the article, this bit also annoys me somewhat: "Infinity Ward's apparent logic for setting up this system is in theory quite sound: the console community online is absolutely devoted to the game and it's not as if there are sustained moans from the userbase about the underlying tech - indeed Xbox Live users pay a premium for it."

    I'm sorry...whut? So the PC gamers who are still running servers for CoD4 (And CoD2), many of which are paid for from server rental companies means PC gamers aren't paying a premium?

    I think the point being made is that, taken in isolation, the technology works well enough, such that people are even willing to pay for it.


    Yeah, the COD engine grew out of the Quake 3 code that dates back to 1999 - id tech 3.

    IIRC the Quake 3 tech used in CoD2 was purely for the data storage / management / access rather than the graphics, physics et al though.
    Edited by 2 at 16/11/09 @ 11:10

  • jambo74 #19 2 years ago

    @Crofto

    They don't care about PC sales. The PC sales do not make enough of a market for them to worry about it anymore.

    Solution - just don't but their games.

    Pirate them you say - a choice, get caught and I'm sure they will make an example of such people.
    You know breaking laws and all that!

    Did you know that some games companies actually put out the torrents with trackers in them so they know WHO is downloading / seeding.
    Edited by 1 at 16/11/09 @ 11:11

  • Xerx3s #20 2 years ago

    jambo74: There is no need to choose, they can simply do both.

  • jambo74 #21 2 years ago

    @Xerx3s

    It is clear they are starting to choose is it not?

  • khaz #22 2 years ago

    @aldo_14

    Taken in isolation? I don't understand. You mean that the p2p system works well enough that xbox live users for the most part dont complain about it?

    I'm not debating that, clearly the p2p technology works well enough for even PC gamers to get the game. The game's stats on xfire - http://ww w.xfire.com/games/codmw2/Call_o... - are testament to the fact that PC gamers still want to play it. My worry is those numbers will fall hard within 6 months.

  • jambo74 #23 2 years ago

    @Bagpuss

    "And of course we all know console owners are a bunch of saints not interested in ripping off the games companies....thats why microsoft just banned the best part of 1 million consoles"

    How many torrent games do you think have been downloaded and used on PC's. I'm willing to bet the number is at least about 20 times larger.

    Thats was not my point however. The point was that there is more money to be made in console games over PC games at this current time. That and the PC userbase has not done themself any favours in letting this happen.
    Edited by 1 at 16/11/09 @ 11:18

  • UncleLou #24 2 years ago

    Yeah. Seeing the piracy figures of CoD 4, I can't say I am surprised.

    In the end though, they're an entertainment company offering an (irrelevant) entertainment product. You can choose to buy it, or not. And it's fair enough to complain about the restrictions and their attempts to turn the PC version into a console game, without the liberties the PC usually offers over consoles.

    To go further than that, and to wish them to go bankrupt, though, strikes me as silly nerdism.
    Edited by 1 at 16/11/09 @ 11:22

  • GaidenZero #25 2 years ago

    @svd_grasshopper - The Edge review was multi-format. They did comment on the PC version and said it wasn't all it could have been, but the review covered 360 and PS3 versions as well.

  • Bagpuss #26 2 years ago

    "Did you know that some games companies actually put out the torrents with trackers in them so they know WHO is downloading / seeding."

    Torrents are for noobs......most of those in the know, now use direct download sites like Rapidshare,Megaupload and the rest...

    Seeing as you are not personally distributing through p2p sharing the games companies can only go after the original file uploader.

  • davisorle #27 2 years ago

    This is why i played the PC version and for many others. Things is that ive been thinking the past montth that my 360 has run a long, heroic run actually ( no RRoD, knocks on wood.. ) and now already we see things that our consoles cant achieve. graphic card prices dropping, new gen ( aka Nvidia's Fermi etc ) coming out from GPU companies, DX11 already there... When you hear from Epic about UE4 that they have been working for, see tech videos from CryEngine2 and you think of how much further they can already go visually, I really think that 4 years of enjoying so many great games on a console has been good.

    I know it sounds inconvinient for those that dont have "spare" money for a new console neither what im saying is cause I do or not, but it seems as if its a good time they start showing the next console round already. ive always been a PC gamer and "then" a console gamer. Ive grown to be lazy and used to play on consoles much more now. ( ofc never when it comes to a game like Dragon Age, MMOs and depends on the FPS title ) so in order for my console to look as good at least as the PC's version of a game we do need some new consoles or I will have to keep buying my games now on the PC instead. Sucks :p

    @khaz
    Agreed. and why i stated ( and ended up doing so ) before the release that I would DL the game for the campaign and buy it only when they release dedicated servers. They wanted to make a profit, avoid piracy, no expences on dedicated servers. All those on the PC gamers' neck with a worst online experience and inconvinience doesnt motivate me to support their cause. I would consider to pay extra for their title for better services and not worst.

  • khaz #28 2 years ago

    @Skillian

    WHAT?! WHERE?! LINK!?!

    If you're messing with me I will gut you. :(

  • Buran #29 2 years ago

    1-You must known that hacked dedicated servers with mods and IWNET ranked already exists for MW 2, proving that IW resistance was useless and futile:

    [link url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rqLUDfl26Y&fe ature=player_embedded#
    ]http://ww w.youtube.com/watch?v=-rqLUDfl2...[/link]

    2-Yo must known that MW 1 sales in PC were about 2,5-3 million, making the MW 2 sales to date a flop compared against his predecessor, so the "but as the collapse of the MW2 "boycott" proved, it's Infinity Ward that holds all the aces here" is a non sense. The boycott is working and most of the clans founding the 14.000 servers that supports the 95% of the gaming community en COD 4 is not migrating to MW 2 but standing in COD 4 and waiting to games such BC 2 and BF 3.

    3-"Like it or not, it's clear that the future of online play involves subscriptions and/or micro-transactions" : This is a misconception.Games as Hellgate. London did proved that micro payments and monthly fees doesn't work always. IW and Activision shoted themselves in a foot: they want to ship a MMFPS based on COD/MW, but the only market viable to the game (the PC market, because per pay MMOs in Xbox 360 and PS3 are a flop niche) are now angry and rabid against the developer and has no chance to make a dent in the market as WoW or Aion or Lineage II did.

    So basically: Call Of Duty 4 is better than MW 2 in evey aspect except maybe graphics and music score, and IW will lost the title of "most played fps online" because MW 2 is not able to support his weak community as COD 4 and COD 2 did, making MW 2 multiplayer a ghost town in matter of weeks.



  • draycen #30 2 years ago

    "the PC version doesn't quite have the same level of optimisation" - It couldn't. It's just not possible to get that kind of optimisation on PC as you don't know exactly what is inside everyone's PC.

  • hiddenranbir #31 2 years ago

    I like how you spoke up graphical options as something that makes it a good port.

  • Subquest #32 2 years ago

    PC gamers, of which I am one, have made a rod for their own backs with the widespread piracy that has existed for years. Some kind of online authentication system is needed for offline games as well as multiplayer. Yes, it'll suck - but better that than no PC games industry at all.

    In 10 - 15 years time it won't matter, I imagine consoles will be powerful enough to keep everybody happy - just don't make me play FPS games with a fucking game pad.

  • Salaminizer #33 2 years ago

    @Subquest: are you really a PC gamer? doesn't seem so, piracy has nothing do to with removing dedicated servers

  • khaz #34 2 years ago

    Piracy has everything to do with dedicated servers. Its one of the main reasons.

    People who pirated the game successfully (I.e. millions of gamers) had access to an absolutely huge online scene on the PC for CoD4. They got free maps, free mods, took part in leagues, made homes in the countless CoD4 communities, had lag free games on dedicated servers.

    Removing dedicated servers removed all of these things in one fell swoop. In addition it allowed IW to introduce the possibility of charging for DLC on the PC which as the recent news article stating that Activision are going to monetise everything to do with CoD online means there is a ready made delivery system with IWNet. It gives IW a more controlled and better method for tracking pirates. It gives IW a Steam-lite method for tracking game stats and most used in game features.

    Removing dedicated servers basically allowed IW and Activision to control the entirety of the content delivery system for any upcoming CoD games starting with MW2.

    Its a whole new ballgame for online PC gaming if IW and Activision make a profit with IWNet on the PC.
    Edited by 2 at 16/11/09 @ 12:59

  • myk #35 2 years ago

    "PC gamers, of which I am one, have made a rod for their own backs with the widespread piracy that has existed for years. Some kind of online authentication system is needed for offline games as well as multiplayer"

    what, like Steam?

    Piracy isn't responsible for the outrage over MW2, Activision trying to eek out every penny from their playerbase is. The changes they have made will make it more likely MW2 will be pirated, so that people can play the game the way they want. There is no way to spin this positively, MW2 on PC is a massive step backwards as a multiplayer game.

  • skillian #36 2 years ago

    @khaz

    [link url=http: //twitter.com/GabeNewell/status/5762800559
    ]http://tw itter.com/GabeNewell/status/576...[/link]

    and Half-Life: Reimagined too, whatever that is...

    edit: If it's a real account. Which it might not be. In which case you can gut me.
    Edited by 2 at 16/11/09 @ 13:06

  • Ringot #37 2 years ago

    @skillian "I totally just hot boxed a conference room with a ginormous fart, don't tell the guys using it in 30 minutes, I want the element of surprise"

    Yep that sounds like authentic Gabe to me!

  • skillian #38 2 years ago

    Actually that does sound like him :p

    But yes, I think you're right and it's fake, so I'm gonna delete that earlier post.

  • Ergates_Antius #39 2 years ago

    and I'm not 100 per cent convinced it's a battle of attribution it can ultimately win.
    "Attrition" surely.

    No idea what a "battle of attribution" would look like -
    "Here, you have it."
    "No, I insist, it's yours"
    "No really, I don't want it, you take it"
    etc...

  • aldo_14 #40 2 years ago

    Taken in isolation? I don't understand. You mean that the p2p system works well enough that xbox live users for the most part dont complain about it?

    I'm not debating that, clearly the p2p technology works well enough for even PC gamers to get the game. The game's stats on xfire - http://ww w.xfire.com/games/codmw2/Call_o... - are testament to the fact that PC gamers still want to play it. My worry is those numbers will fall hard within 6 months.

    I mean... if you didn't already have a better, dedicated server solution (like, anywhere), then you could justify P2P. Because it does work - if it didn't people wouldn't be willing to pay for it, aside from everything else - it just happens to be palpably not as good as the dedicated server approach.

    So, like, in isolation from knowing about dedicated servers.

    That's what I took from reading that.

    Certainly can't see myself buying MW2 for the multiplayer - the player caps and the lag issues with P2P pretty much neuter the appeal of any of the new features over the prequel.

  • JahB #41 2 years ago

    Infinity Ward are a dead developer to me now, not interested in any of their future products.

    gee, so they'll sell only 14,999,999 copies of the next modern warfare then. i'm sure your butthurt boycott will make them change their minds.

    oh wait...

  • khaz #42 2 years ago

    @aldo14

    Your wording still confuses me so bear with me here! :D

    Basically you're saying P2P bad and dedis good? Other games have dedis (Including CoD4) so why bother with MW2 PC version?

    Amirite?

  • orangpelupa #43 2 years ago

    @kaz
    and if you unlock the MW2 CONSOLE (press ~)
    then type --> xb

    you will see vars like this

    xblivesignedin
    xbliveconnectblablablabla
    xblivekeepplayoffine (or something similar)

    --> the screenshots i take
    [link url=http://game.aoindonesia.net/sampah/DamnWarfail2-4.png ]http://ga me.aoindonesia.net/sampah/DamnW...[/link]
    [link url=http://game.aoindonesia.net/sampah/DamnWarfail2-2.png ]http://ga me.aoindonesia.net/sampah/DamnW...[/link]
    [link url=http://game.aoindonesia.net/sampah/DamnWarfail2-3.png ]http://ga me.aoindonesia.net/sampah/DamnW...[/link]
    [link url=http://game.aoindonesia.net/sampah/DamnWarfail2-1.png ]http://ga me.aoindonesia.net/sampah/DamnW...[/link]

    the pc version IS the port from xbox... OUCH.


    @article
    in short:
    Infinity Wards NOT WANT MW2 to be played by Asian (who have bad upload speed)........ ugh..... ouch....

    all of my friends and my CoD4 clan member, can't play MW2 on multiplay.
    we tried doing SpecOps but its very lag. we cant move at all. jumpy back and forth.

    i blame this because the P2P method....
    our internet connection only offer 64kbps Upstream and 384kbps-1Mbps downstream. and we already using the BIGGEST ISP in our country.

    we need dedicated server support.

    i finished MW2 only in 4hours, i think the "premium price" is really dissapointing. because MW2 only finish in 4hours. not like the MW1. it never ends. always having fun in the MP.

    This will make very few gamer (in asia) will buy the game.because our very slow Upstream speed. we unable to play multiplay.

    -->> less PC sales, Activision/IW show less revenue in PC, Activision/IW think PC gamer dont want their game, Activision/IW blame Piracy again..........
    Edited by 2 at 16/11/09 @ 14:15

  • Subquest #44 2 years ago

    @Myk:what, like Steam?

    Steam doesn't make you authenticate when you play offline. I'm talking about mandatory online authentication for every game. Sure, it's not a perfect idea, it would annoy a lot of people playing on laptops, airplanes etc. Perhaps once every 3 or 5 times you start a game.

    @Salaminizer: Only the last 16 years mate. What khaz said. In any case my point was less about this one game, more about that PC plays second fiddle to consoles now in multiformat development, and will likely do so forever more, increasingly so. Piracy has strangled the life out of it. If there's so little return, why bother? It's a shame, when done right PC does everything better than consoles - not just gaming, due to it's open nature.

  • andromeda #45 2 years ago

    @svd_grasshopper

    amen to that my friend

    i found it extremely underwhelming too.

    Never before have I played so much MORE OF THE SAME...

    and its linearity is beginning to get really tiresome.

  • rotmm #46 2 years ago

    PS3 version sucks http://www .youtube.com/watch?v=mQpcO8x6NNY ;)

  • dsmx #47 2 years ago

    What's really annoys me is whole way the PC versions was handled if they'd of actually told everyone months ago what they were doing to the PC version the outcry wouldn't of been so big.

    Then to top it all off they said that these changes were to make the game better, despite the fact that dedicated servers are the best solution AND there is no reason why you can't have dedicated servers and the system they're currently using. The only reason they got rid of dedicated servers was so they could sell map packs on the PC, charge monthly fees to play and to basically say when you can't play the game online any more.

  • Zappa #48 2 years ago

    lol the extra texture still looks like crap and most console games still own it.

    MW2 looks like trash but what can you expect with a quake engine lol.

  • rotmm #49 2 years ago

    @Zappa,

    lol.

  • dsmx #50 2 years ago

    I'm struggling to thing of any PC game that doesn't have texture settings. Hell even flash games have quality settings and there little 5 MB free games

  • Machiavellian #51 2 years ago

    Here's hoping this is hacked to buggery, and the server/LAN version becomes the most pirated game in history. It's the first time ever I've wanted mass piracy to destroy a games company, but they brought it on themselves.

    Too late, that was MW1 which was pirated to hell and back which resulted in MW2 gameplan. It really will not matter if MW2 get the same treatment because IW already expect that from PC gamers. Also you can believe the next game plan will be to run code directly from IW servers that way, those nasty hackers will really have a challenge.

    One big problem I have with the PC community is that their answer to a game that does not provide them with something they want is to pirate the game. How many post have we seen in this thread alone as using pirating as a solution to developers and publishers decisions. PC gamers act like they are entitled to more effort but then again you turn around and spit in developers faces when they give it to you. You make all kinds of excuses for your action and then wonder why those privileges get revoked. In the end, the Paid Dedicated Server route EA is using will be the best of both worlds. If you are going to have DS you might as well make a profit from it. Lock em down so you cannot get unauthorized access to files so hackers can create their own DS.

    Interesting enough, ID software is also looking at getting rid of Dedicated Servers for their next game. IW, I can see them doing this but ID. Man they must really not like piracy to make this move.

  • Feanor #52 2 years ago

    A good article, but I take issue with this line: "but as the collapse of the MW2 "boycott" proved, it's Infinity Ward that holds all the aces here"

    Is this based solely on the screenshot of the "Boycott Modern Warfare 2" Steam group showing more than half of the first page were playing the game? Because that group has less than 1,000 members, so even if everyone in that group bought the game, it's a drop in the bucket compared to the 200,000+ who signed the petition.

    http://st eamcommunity.com/groups/wewantd...

  • TheGuvernor #53 2 years ago

    My biggest issue with this whole PC fiasco is the sense of betryal.
    IW/Activision made it big purely through the pc communities' efforts/adoption back with the original COD, after they split from MOH.
    As one of many who PAID for & played their games from the get go - I am totally disgusted with these companies.
    Hardcore pc enthusiasts spend significantly more money on hardware as well as DS etc.
    We drive the industry as early adopters of new tech.
    A little more respect for the millions of pc gamers like myself who don't pirate would go along way.
    IW can suck a BIG HAIRY WANGER - as can all these sicophantic games websites with no balls between 'em.
    If these companies are so brilliant then devise tech to thwart hackers that doesn't screw the legit gamer.
    I truely hope that new devs emerge to fill the void & that legit pc gamers support them in droves.
    Rock on L4D2 & BF3.
    Edited by 3 at 16/11/09 @ 19:23

  • L1nc3 #54 2 years ago


    I've downloaded MW2 from a torrent and I shout it out loud though I don't approve it in general. I simply WILL NOT buy this game. Two of my friends have bought it and I'm disgusted by that, but I guess the Activision / IW did ONE thing right: the marketing

  • cianchristopher #55 2 years ago

    I'm a PC gamer, and I can totally understand why IW/Activision went down this route.

    PC gaming is dying (yes, yes I know we've all heard that before) - seriously, it is!

    Piracy is killing it, the massive success of Xbox LIVE and (to a lesser extent, PSN) has shown developers that they will make more money from console versions of their games than PC versions.

    Not to mention the pissy, self-entitled, I-want-it-now tantrums that PC gamers throw every time one of the big releases comes out.

    And what of the rampant and unstoppable piracy/theft that takes place on every single PC game. And while Xbox has had this problem, it is nowhere near the levels of piracy on PC.

    The PC is a huge headache for developers, I can't really blame them for turning their backs on it! The returns are not worth the hassle. The money simply isn't there.

    And yes, PC gaming is dying, in 10 years there'll be nothing but consoles!
    Edited by 1 at 16/11/09 @ 21:14

  • Subquest #56 2 years ago

    L1nc3 - so that's the answer? you stupid prick. wave goodbye to pc gaming.








  • Machiavellian #57 2 years ago

    My biggest issue with this whole PC fiasco is the sense of betryal.

    But who betrayed who first. The way I look at it, the PC community betrayed IW first. There is no bone about it, MW1 was pirated more than it sold on the PC. MW1 was played online with pirated copies more than legit copies of the game by more than 2 to 1. What exactly did PC gamers expect to happen with those numbers from the sequel. Do PC gamer expect companies to just take it.

    You read a lot of forums and that's exactly the attitude of PC gamers. "You cannot beat piracy so just take it". "DRM will never stop piracy so just give up". "If you release the game without any DRM you will get more sales(yeah that didn't happen)". "You sold 200,000 on the PC version you should be happy". The list goes on and on. PC gamers are always finding excuses to excuse pirating but when it hits home, they still only have excuses. I am not even saying that IW did the correct thing, only that you knew that something was going to happen weather PC gamers liked it or not. Legit PC gamers are becoming more of a minority than the ones who pirate games. You wonder why you have no voice and that's your answer. You comprise a very small niche or an even smaller niche of sales for IW so why would they listen to legit buyers. Even then, the solution for most of you is to pirate the game then to not buy it which makes it even worst.

    Oh well, PC gamers can stick to their guns and pirate the game because the developer has taken PC features away but that solution definitely leads to other developers taken notice and not the way you think. No body likes to be the slave of someone else and you can believe developers will not like to be the slave of the PC community who thinks only of themselves.

  • local_celebrity #58 2 years ago

    @Ergates_Antius

    No, a battle of attribution would look more like:

    "Here, I did that"
    "No, actually, this is my work" etc...

    Probably the most famous battle of attribution has been the Shakespeare authorship question. To my mind, however, this was surpassed by the recent Spandau Ballet controversy (Did Kemp really pen 'Gold'? Or should salad-dodging Hadley get more of the credit?)

  • cianchristopher #59 2 years ago

    As Machiavellian said, the PC version of Modern Warfare 1 was pirated more than it was legitimately sold on the PC!

    And that game actually had dedicated servers.

    What the fuck did you guys think was gonna happen with the sequel?

    Companies (not just Activision, sse id Software with Rage) are getting sick of this "PC gamer" bullshit!

    It's all gonna end soon enough!

    PC gaming is on the way out! Only World Of Warcraft and Valve games (thanks to Steam) actually have a handle on the situation now, and things can only go downhill from here (especially when one looks at all the moaning and complaining and whinging and crying that PC gamers actually do)!

    And what then? Even if IW released this game with dedicated servers and lean controls and console commands and everything else that the last version had - it'd still be pirated to all hell by "PC gamers" the world over! No doubt about it! It would have been pirated non-stop even with all the missing features that "PC gamers" bemoan at present....

    So, what's the point? Why bother with a PC version? Seriously?

    From a business point of view, what-is-the-point?

  • Pablo2k5 #60 2 years ago

    @ cianchristopher "PC gaming is dying etc"

    PC gaming is not dying, fact. Unless you think that an $11 billion dollar industry (and growing) is dying.

    [link url=http://www.videogamer.com/news /pc_gaming_markets_annual_revenue_is_11_billion.html
    ]http://ww w.videogamer.com/news/pc_gaming...[/link]

    World of Warcraft has over 11.5 million, yes million users.

    Alot of PC gamers use digital distribution now, Steam, Direct-2-Drive and even Amazon are getting in on the action.

    You are wrong sir.

    Of course, as you say in ten years time the PC may have 'died' (about the only thing you got right in your rant) but so will have consoles...
    Edited by 1 at 17/11/09 @ 00:21

  • Pablo2k5 #61 2 years ago

    @ cianchristopher "So, what's the point? Why bother with a PC version? Seriously?"

    PC gamers will get PC games, not dumbed down console ports.

    Why would a bunch of angry PC gamers upset you so? Leave us to it.

  • reginald_roper #62 2 years ago

    "As expected, Modern Warfare 2's online gaming system is - in essence - a PC rendition of the console code where a peer-to-peer system has replaced the concept of setting up dedicated servers."

    Modern Warfare 2 isn't based on peer to peer networking. It has the same old client/server architecture as do most first person shooters. The difference is that it uses a listen server (as opposed to a dedicated server) that can be migrated when the host goes down.

  • Postumo #63 2 years ago

    mmm slow downs?? frame rate drops? i'm not having those issues... I'm running it fine on a GTX275 at 1680x1050 everything maxed out

  • hahayou #64 2 years ago

    Is there splitscreen on PC?

    @STKD - ET:QW was a PC lead platform game. But you can add Resi 5 to the list.

  • o_ci2007 #65 2 years ago

    PC gaming is dying, ha ha ha ha ha ha. Sims 3 sold more than Uncharted, Killzone 2 and Resistance 2 and all these are triple AAA blockbuster titles for the PS3. I wont even mention World of Warcraft.
    [link url=http:// arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2009/08/sales-down-for-ea-but-si ms-3-and-ea-sports-active-sell-big.ars
    ]http://ar stechnica.com/gaming/news/2009/...[/link]
    Developers can see that there is potential on the PC and remember even if it sells just 200 000 copies and you factor in the cost of developing for a pc against say the ps3 the profits margins are higher and so worth it.

  • Quixz #66 2 years ago

    Is it just me or does DF's pc not run as it should..?

    "Running Modern Warfare 2 on a Core i7 system running Windows 7 and a GTX295, I was able to run the game with everything at maximum at 1080p, albeit with some quite alarming drops in performance later on in the game."

    http://ww w.guru3d.com/article/call-of-du...

    GTX295/ i7 Gets:

    125 FPS @ 2560 X 1600 AA X0
    104 FPS @ 2560 X 1600 AA X4

    163FPS @ 1920 X 1200 AA X0
    132FPS @ 1920 X 1200 AA X4
    Edited by 1 at 17/11/09 @ 04:02

  • Machiavellian #67 2 years ago

    PC gaming is not dying, fact. Unless you think that an $11 billion dollar industry (and growing) is dying.

    [link url=http://ww w.videogamer.com/news/pc_gaming...
    ]http://ww w.videogamer.com/news/pc_gaming...[/link]

    World of Warcraft has over 11.5 million, yes million users.

    No PC gaming is not dying but the PC gaming I enjoyed growing up is. The freedom I enjoyed where companies tried to out do themselves to provide features for the PC community because those companies could depend on sells if they did. Now, that is not the case. PC companies have to torrent their games just to try getting people to actually purchase their games. Companies like ID who you can call the champion of PC gaming is thinking of taking away dedicated servers to prevent piracy. Valve and other big name PC developers are developing on consoles first before the PC. PC developers now are centering their entire development around consoles now. No PC gaming is not dieing but you can believe in the next 5 years, you will not recognize what it will change into.

  • Deadpool996 #68 2 years ago

    @ Quixz - 'Is it just me or does DF's pc not run as it should..?'

    It could be that he isn't using the latest Nvidia drivers, I've got SLI GTX 275 and only after installing the 191.07 drivers did I see SLI kick in.
    Also got a weird rare bug where the cards will drop in low power mode, happened in Batman:AA aswell.

    Does Richard read these comments? Wouldn't mind informing him about the latest drivers.

  • Merefield #69 2 years ago

    Am i the only one that loves this on the PC?

    I would never consider swapping mouse/keyboard for a gamepad on MW2 (to be fair though, i've never tried it)

    The P2P thing is really innovative, good for them for trying something new.

    The unlocks and challenges system is perfect and makes for a very addictive experience.

    It deserves the review scores, and would have even if it had only shipped with the multiplayer!

    If it had had lean it would have been a 10!
    Edited by 1 at 17/11/09 @ 13:18

  • lolife.se #70 2 years ago

    retrend, please, indulge us about what is shit about P2P...

  • Pablo2k5 #71 2 years ago

    @ Machiavellian

    I tend to agree with you. I just had to respond to cianchristopher's baseless rant.

  • Kaminari #72 2 years ago

    "Do not try and beat the hackers. The more you piss them off trying, the more they're going to come back and punish you harder for it."

    Yeah, that's the spirit. Viva la revoluzion...!

    ... Until the day the publishers will decide to stop releasing products for your PC altogether, and there will be nothing left to hack per se. With less than 10% of the market, the PC scene doesn't represent any sort of "core" user fanbase anymore whatsoever. Activision can afford loosing those 10%, believe me.

  • Matthew_Hornet #73 2 years ago

    In short, Infinity Ward is clearly marginalising the traditional way of playing on PC in favour of a performance-impeded rendition that encourages more players to get involved, while at the same time offering the developer a strong level of control over the audience.
    ...I suspect it's only a matter of time before pirate server/LAN-enabled versions appear.

    This. This sums all of it up. This is Activision all the way, trying to squeeze every last bit of cash they can out of their 'consumers', penny-pinching their way into a universally hated company flogging a bunch of exhausted franchises. I say 'universally hated' because I believe they've become the kind of company that will water down their products beyond all measure in a mistaken belief that it will bring them more customers, and won't understand how they insult their audience by doing it.

    @Kaminari:
    Activision can afford loosing (sic) those 10%, believe me.
    What I'm trying to say is, we can afford to lose Activision.
    Edited by 1 at 18/11/09 @ 03:34

  • FooAtari #74 2 years ago

    @Kaminari

    Yeah I keep hearing about the PC dying as a games platform, been hearing it for about 8 or 9 years now in fact...

    Just look at the success of Steam, PC Gaming isn't going anywhere soon.

    I believe CoD 4 sold over a million units on the PC. Any company what be VERY stupid to willingly throw that kind of money away.

  • Razer #75 2 years ago

    The mp matchmaking on PC is ,quite simply, shite. Don't get me wrong, the actual mp gameplay is great and I'm thoroughly enjoying it but the way the matchmaking is handled is frustrating.

    I'm level 34 online, so I've played a fair bit over the last week and some nights IWnet is shocking. Take last night for example...

    Find game...we need 6 more players...trying to merge our lobby with another...we need 1 more player...merging lobby with another...match starting...we need 3 more players...match starting...oh,no,wait,merging lobby with another...match starting...lobby closed...rinse and repeat to fade.

    Over a 2 hour play session, I managed 3 different maps several times over, at one point is took me and a friend 20 minutes to get into a game. Various problems with 'unable to connect to host', game freezing at loading screen, being kicked back to main menu as match starts, do not a good customer experience make.

    Not that IW care. They are too busy rolling around in piles of cash and laughing to themselves.

  • hollowroom #76 2 years ago

    This is the first Call of Duty game I won't be buying.

    I only buy it for the multiplayer, which has (since CoD2) been great fun.

    As soon as I heard about the lack of Dedis, I just forgot about it. And here's why:

    I'm one of the idiots that bought Operation Flashpoint2:DR on pre order: if that's the future of Multiplayer gaming, we'll all be nade spamming in Karkand on Battlefield 2 in five years time.