No dedicated servers for PC MW2

By Tom Bramwell Published 19 October, 2009

"You're completely reliant on IWNet."

Infinity Ward appears to have dumped dedicated servers for the PC version of Modern Warfare 2 in favour of its own proprietary matchmaking service.

According to IW's Robert Bowling, speaking about 1 hour 40 minutes into the BASH podcast (thanks Kotaku), the new service will be called IWNet and is part of the developer's attempts to make the game "very equal on every platform".

"We've been building up this system on the backend called IWNet to allow matchmaking for our PC users as well, just like you have on the console that's built in on Xbox Live and PSN, but PC never had it, so we're building in our own, you know, matchmaking so you can get in there and play with players your same rank," Bowling explained.

"You're completely reliant on IWNet, and there's no dedicated server or server list, so you rely on IWNet for your matchmaking on your games, but then you also have the private match, much like the other platforms, where you can go in and customise and, you know, turn off air support, turn off this, turn off that, customise the game rules all via private match, and invite people to the server that way."

When asked to confirm that this meant no dedicated servers, Bowling replied, to stunned silence from the PC fans running the podcast, "Correct. Yep."

Asked whether this meant each player's PC would have to host other players, he said: "As far as I know. But as far as getting down into the technicals of all IWNet, I'm hoping we can get some, you know, get some of the tech guys into some stuff later on to explain it in depth."

He also said that the player limit would be greater on PC than on console, and that since IWNet worked in conjunction with Steam the game would use VAC rather thank PunkBuster to detect cheating.

Bowling was coy about other specifics. Asked about support for custom content and modifications, all he would say is that he wasn't certain about the future of IWNet. "I know they're putting a lot of work into it and the stuff you'll be able to do to it later on," he said.

"But at launch it's mostly focused on, you know, handling all the matchmaking and all that stuff. But for customising your game to playing how you want, you're going to have quite a few options in private match to do all the typical stuff you would do - remove things, or change things to make it more realistic, changing health variables, or damage variables and spawn, and all that stuff can be done via private match."

One of the chaps on the BASH podcast then tried to pin Bowling down about the dedicated server issue, suggesting that perhaps a wily operator could buy another copy of the game, install a meaty graphics card in his dedicated server and still run the game for other people to connect to as if the server were a fellow client. But Bowling either didn't hear this properly or didn't reply to it directly, as he reiterated the previous point about graduating to IWNet for "accessibility" reasons.

He did, though, say that patches could follow the release of the game according to feedback from the PC community. (Yeah. Er, probably do expect some feedback.)

Asked how he saw the Modern Warfare PC community two or three months down the line, he said: "I think that's going to be much more like the rest of the gaming scene, where you have your sites where you congregate and you discuss and you set up matches and you schedule, and then you jump into a private match and you invite everybody in, and you do your clan games there.

"Much more than how it currently is in PC where you have your clan... everything's ran by... you have complete control. This is much more of a communal thing."

Inevitably there's already a petition (45,000 signatures at the time of writing) set up to "get Infinity Ward to review [its] decision not to allow fully dedicated servers for [Modern Warfare 2]."

"Remember that this Call of Duty was made popular by PC Gamers who have supported the series throughout," the petition notes.

Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (77) Latest comment 2 years ago

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

  • Cpt_McOneball #1 2 years ago

    The PC guys have been going absolutely mental over on the IW forums, really bad.

  • Whizzo #2 2 years ago

    "Never in the field of conflict gaming have so many pre-orders turned to so few" as Churchill didn't say.

  • Promey #3 2 years ago

    The only reason I buy CoD games anymore is for the online multiplayer. Now that they've messed that up... pre-order cancelled.
    Edited by 2 at 19/10/09 @ 09:30

  • paulf #4 2 years ago

    mmm lets make something that works really well into something that works not as well, not a good move

  • RobotRocker #5 2 years ago

    Not heard: Bobby Kottick cackling away in his Transylvania Castle

  • geeza2020 #6 2 years ago

    Oh, not another petition by PC owners..... wont they ever stop?

  • kangarootoo #7 2 years ago

    Explain to someone who left PC gaming behind years ago, what effect does this not havcing dedicated servers have on the game?

  • DDevil #8 2 years ago

    Petitions ALWAYS work. They're NEVER pointless! That's why they're used so often.

  • kangarootoo #9 2 years ago

    @DDevil

    Sarcasm?

  • Fab4 #10 2 years ago

    Wouldnt be so bad if their matchmaking was worth a crap, but it isnt. In fact its some of the shitiest matchmaking I've seen in a console game.

  • kangarootoo #11 2 years ago

    @MilkybKid1985

    So in a nutshell, no dedicated servers means that one of the players in the game is hosting the game on his/her own PC? I can see how that might cause a few headaches.


    "And this is assuming that IW have some sort of server farm where they will have there own servers that we will use"

    If they DO have that sort of thing set up, is that not effectively the same as having dedicated servers?


    Are there any other popular games out there with no dedicated servers? How do they deal with things?

  • Water1111 #12 2 years ago

    Does this mean you won't be able to do lans?

  • smoison #13 2 years ago

    Matchmaking is the worst part about L4D PC, but at least they use dedicated servers!

    I will stay away from this untill it gets fixed (or hacked back in).

  • Mangerman #14 2 years ago

    @kangarootoo

    "If they DO have that sort of thing set up, is that not effectively the same as having dedicated servers?"

    Not really, because from what Robert Bowling said, there won't be any search function to find the server you want to play on, thus there still won't be any sense of community.

  • JonFE #15 2 years ago

    @kangarootoo:

    If I dared to guess, I'd say that with multiplayer completely reliant on IWNet's backend, people fear that they will be restricted by and totally dependent on Infinity Ward (or is that Activision?).

    They may also fear that CoD's multiplayer success (as already demonstrated with the previous installations) could lead Activision to start charging for the privilege and having that tied to their service makes that aim easier to accomplish.
    Edited by 2 at 19/10/09 @ 10:02

  • Danoxth #16 2 years ago

    It's also going to have quite a big impact on the competitive gaming arena, not to mention clans now get royally smacked in the face.

    Read that there was approx 14,000 dedicated Modern Warfare servers, and although can't be sure of the number I wouldn't be that surprised.

    Companies that rent game servers must be spitting feathers =/

  • spiny #17 2 years ago

    I feel a great disturbance in the force, as if a million pre-orders cried out and were suddenly canceled.

    Anyone for cod4?

  • Fab4 #18 2 years ago

    MrMarc marked down for being a pretentious git.

  • Tetsuo_Shima #19 2 years ago

    Fab4 marked up for making me chuckle

  • Ringot #20 2 years ago

    Woah hold on there EG, your actually posting relevant links within the article now instead of us having to google to get to some source of information?!?! What is this 1996?

  • Rirekon #21 2 years ago

    So basically IW are making the PC version of MW2's multiplayer work the same was as it currently does on the console... and this kills multiplayer how?
    360 multiplayer games are almost always hosted on a client machine rather than a dedicated server, it's been that way for years and for the most part works out fine. I really don't see the issue here.

  • Freek #22 2 years ago

    It works on consoles because that's a different audiance.

    On the PC side of things, modded maps, custom settings, private clan servers, admin features are simply the norm for FPS games. They do not like having all those things removed from the game.

  • General_Zod #23 2 years ago

    If anyone thinks IW are going to be running a dedicated server cluster themselves they are smoking crack. Server clusters cost far more money than releasing a dedicated server option that players can setup. All this means is that the host will be one of the players, meaning smaller player count and the chance to be sent to a host on the other side of the world. Activision are doing this so that they can push PC users to buy map packs and buy any of the mods that they approve. I HATE matchmaking and although I was not going to buy MW2 on release I was going to purchase it later on, thanks for saving me some monies IW!

  • crozon #24 2 years ago

    "So basically IW are making the PC version of MW2's multiplayer work the same was as it currently does on the console... and this kills multiplayer how?
    360 multiplayer games are almost always hosted on a client machine rather than a dedicated server, it's been that way for years and for the most part works out fine. I really don't see the issue here."

    yeah well you never play on dedicated servers so you won't know about the lag issues. From my experience using dedicated servers means less lag and i can pick choose servers according to ping and player count. don't want that lagfest you console gamers put up with.
    fuck this not buying this game. what about lan support????

  • Chazmeister #25 2 years ago

    You would have thought with all this extra money they are charging for the game, that they could afford to run a few dedicated servers.

  • rawburger #26 2 years ago

    Was not going to buy full price, waiting for a decent price drop was the plan. Now, waiting for a server list is now the plan.

    If a game does not let me tell my clan mates, "hey guys, this server has a really nice ping, do you want the I.P, or, this server has decent moderators active come and join, just remember not to bunnyhop.", is in my opinion an epic fail.

  • Raiten #27 2 years ago

    They're realy pushing their luck with this game.. and this latest pc feature will without doubt cause more harm than good for them.
    Dedicated servers are allways better than the matchmaking system on consoles, there's variery of reasons why and some of those have been told allready.

    But the main advantage a dedicated server has is that, you never need to wait for some sort of matchmaking to gatherup all the players needed to finaly start a match. Instead you can allways open the game, check the server list and choose where you want to play instantly, along with having the benefit of people being able to freely join midmatch without any troubles.

  • Masterless #28 2 years ago

    I'm jumping on the "cancelling my pre-order" bandwagon.

    Latency issues aside, this is still really retarded. In COD4, I only ever play on my favourite 3-5 servers as I know the other who play on them. Certain servers through time evolve in to a demographic and now this can't happen.

    Also, if you and a friend want to join an already active game and you both have different levels how are you meant to play together? A private game yes but it only starts as 1v1 them, are you expect to wait for it to fill? Bollocks!

  • Buran #29 2 years ago

    Without dedicated servers and mod support the multiplayer in MW2 is already dead. WaW has no dedicated servers and his population is only 1/6 of COD 4 and 1/3 of COD 2 -which is 3 years older!-. And without mp the PC sales will be abysmal (no one will pay 60 $/€ to a 8 hours "on rails" campaign).

    In the fisrt person shooters, I can't remember a single game I 've played in which his mp has not supported dedicated servers. From UT 2004, BF2, F.E.A.R., Quake Wars, Crysis Wars... All my time in clan servers or in official servers from the publisher.

    Even in PS3: UT III has dedicated servers supported by Midway (even if the max players in console version is limited to 16), Killzone 2 (32 players), Resistance (40 players), Resistance 2 (60 players), MAG beta (256 players)... all with dedicated servers support.

    Confront it: MW2 in PC isn't a PC game. Is a 360 version with better res and k+m support that doesn't even has split screen -useless, but another deficiency-.

    Activision is moving in a very risky direction, taking in consideration that more than 50% of his money comes from the PC market (with WoW overshadowing all). His rivals will take advantage from the mistake, and games as Bad Company 2, Battlefield 3, Rage and Crysis 2 will fill the gap. Even worse: COD 4 players will focus in the older versions of the series because the mod support and free stuff. But the community will lose strength because of the lack of future for clans and modders, resulting in a migration to other games.
    Edited by 1 at 19/10/09 @ 11:38

  • hollowroom #30 2 years ago

    If you want to know how well this works, check out Operation Flashpoint 2 multiplayer.

    It's a disaster.

    Massive pings, no way to know where the game is being hosted, no anti cheat (at least COD will have that) and, in the case of OF2 no CD keys. It's already a laggy hackfest.

    For most PC gamers, dedicated servers are a must.

    Battlefield 2 still has over 1300 servers on my list, so I'll be staying there I think.

  • Co_Starring #31 2 years ago

    DLC is the key here.
    People will need to start paying instead of waiting for the free stuff. (remember, PC players got theirs for free after about 3 months. This costs ActiBlizz a lot of potential revenue)
    It isn't so much about the servers, I think.

  • des #32 2 years ago

    Bah,PC market is just going through some necessary transformations,you going to see a lot of things like this in the future.

  • ToySoldier94 #33 2 years ago

    i have a ps3 and 360 but i buy pc verson on cod for one resone i can pick what server i want to join pre order cancelled

  • gjgjg #34 2 years ago

    lol, good move activision / IW. great understanding of what the PC market wants. ...fail

  • kangarootoo #35 2 years ago

    Thanks to those who responded. I understand the situation a little better now. And I agree that comparisons to the world of consoles don't really float, as versatility is one of the key advantages of PC gaming.

    The only thing that would ever draw me back is mods and things of that ilk. It is one of the biggests strengths of the platform, and stuff like this reduces that strength.

  • Buran #36 2 years ago

    @Co_Starring:

    It will cost a lot more money to Activision if the people flee from his game to some others in which modders offer free stuff and have full community support. Titan Pack from UT III is free, and the game has toms of mods. The same with BD2/2142, Crysis Wars and COD 4. ¿Why the people will jump to MW 2 if it offers lesss for more money?

    Probably, new weapons and contents from MW2 multiplayer will be hacked and modded to COD 4 servers, that will be ironic.

  • Spekingur #37 2 years ago

    So... if they one day stop supporting the game (as happens with games that get old) but alot of people are still playing it - what happens?
    If IWNet is a community portal towards finding friends, putting up groups to play with, etc then that's going to be awesome. But it should just be an addition to an already great game, changing it too much has always proved to be more hazardous than "a good idea".

  • JahB #38 2 years ago

    well it's pretty obvious why this is happening...

    a) much better situation for ubi to sell DLC maps
    b) i bet my next salary that IWnet has some kind of piracy protection (be it serial numbers, some DRM check or anything else)

    this will probably change the face of PC gaming quite a bit, and i'm afraid it won't be for the better...

  • Nodebug #39 2 years ago

    IMO it seems to me like a blatant Activision decision based on future profits.

    Basically now that they have control over the gaming servers, that also means they have control to disable them when they like (think of all the EA games whose servers were switched off down the line). So when they decide they want everyone to switch to COD7 or 8, they just switch off the server support for MW2 and everyone runs out to buy a copy of the newer game...or not.

  • paketep #40 2 years ago

    Kotick's dirty work: first SC2's LAN, then the abysmal Wolfenstein, and now this bullshit.

    Guess Activision is not going to get any of my money anymore.

  • Roamer #41 2 years ago

    That's actually the most worrying thing about this. This has just shortened the life span of MW2 considerably. You see this in console games all the time, where the multiplayer option gets shut down after a few years. On the PC however, you can often play 10 year old games and still find opponents, even for smaller games.

    Hope this has noticable impact on PC sales.

  • jellyhead #42 2 years ago

    If it does impact sales on PC you can bet they'll be whining about piracy rather than their own ineptitude of gimping the PC version.

  • Mooglepies #43 2 years ago

    Ha. Hahahahahaha. Ha.

    As a PC gamer, I laugh. I laugh for what we have and what we've lost. It strikes me that some of the larger PC developers are completely missing the strong points of the PC platform over consoles (and vice versa), in an attempt to completely homogenise the offerings available.

    It's not just that you can add some nice shiny higher res textures, it's the sense of community that builds around a group of people that run their own server with their own rules, it's the crazed loon that spends 10 hours a day creating brand new game modes and nude mods for the latest releases, it's the FREEDOM TO CHOOSE.

    The same way I've chosen not to buy this game.

    That said, this still hasn't been confirmed and I await the damage control with a sense of barely contained glee.

  • makeamazing #44 2 years ago

    Unfortunately the PC has become the poor relation in gaming since this generation of consoles....and unfortunately its not going to get any better... I dont want to say the "PC is dead"... but its not the primary platform anymore... just look at the gaming charts, PC is just a small percentage of sales compared to consoles.

    At least Diablo and Starcraft are PC only... for Now!

  • Bagpuss #45 2 years ago


    Fucking console kiddies.....this is what you and your fisher price toys have done.

    The only red ring of death id like to see you get is a red hot poker up your arses.......





  • Buran #46 2 years ago

    @makeamazing: yeah, for this reason are you playing The Witcher, S.T.A.L.K.E.R., Dawn OF War II, ArmA II, Crysis & Warhead, Sins Of Solar Empire and some other amazing games in console, uh?

    The market of games in PC area is fine, retail sells are the same or a bit less than in previous years, but the digital sells are in a boom. The only problem is that this will not be a reason to nerf the quality of the launchships, that seems that is the point with MW 2.

  • ManicDrunkMonk #47 2 years ago

    Bagpuss wrote :
    "Fucking console kiddies.....this is what you and your fisher price toys have done.

    The only red ring of death id like to see you get is a red hot poker up your arses......."

    /irony overload


  • Buran #48 2 years ago

    @donnie080208:

    How you can talk in that way? You known that more than the 50% of Activision-Blizzard revenues came from PC titles, with WoW overshadowing any pity sales in console franchises? You known that COD 4 has ver 14.000 still active dedicated servers? You known that COD 4 in consoles has no leagues, no stable communities, no custom maps, no promod competition? Are you mad?

    PC gaming is the state-of-the-art in gaming, both in technical quality and provided contents and strength of the community. Almost any console game is dead after a 5 years cycle, whereas in PC gaming all the best games -Starcraft, UT, Quake, Diablo, Warcraft III...- is everlasting, thanx to the community support, mods, new contents and the use of dedicated servers...

    You known that F.E.A.R. is still more played online than F.EA.R. 2, even the new one was launched this year, 3 years after the first one? This is because the quality of the first version -developed directly to PC- in contrast with the sequel -that is worse in both graphics and contents- was deployed for the console market.

    Aside from my loved fighting titles, my main platform for gaming is PC. And if Infinity Ward likes the matchmaking from consoles, them use the model of PS3 first parties: dedicated servers in KZ2, Resistance, R2, Warhawk, Uncharted 2. MAG.

    IW will lost. As Microsoft with his GFWL with anual fee was crushed ant turned into ashes. They will come in the future with the support that fans demans or it will totally overshadowed in PC gaming online by the last iterations of his games (COD 4, COD 2) or thye competence (BF 2/2142, Bad Company 2, BF 3, Crysis 2).
    Edited by 1 at 19/10/09 @ 14:09

  • JahB #49 2 years ago

    Fucking console kiddies.....this is what you and your fisher price toys have done.

    The only red ring of death id like to see you get is a red hot poker up your arses.......

    Fixed.

    Fucking PC pirates.....this is what you and your "i don't pay for games" attitudes have done.

  • JahB #50 2 years ago

    @Milky

    console piracy is nowhere near as widespread as its PC counterpart, and it's relatively easy to take care of, due to the system in place.

    i'm not taking sides here, but saying "it's the fault of these console idiots" is just not true - if PC games didn't have piracy rates going up to 90% (World Of Goo and Demigod, I'm looking at you), developers would not spend large amounts of money to create systems that deal with this problem.

    and while it may be true that pc gamers don't usually take this kinda crap from publishers, the fact that IWnet is coming (and LAN generally seems to disappear, see SC2) only goes to show that the community you speak of is now so small that devs/publishers don't care anymore.

    edit: typo
    Edited by 1 at 19/10/09 @ 15:20

  • Byzanite #51 2 years ago

    Im buying Dragon Age instead!

  • JahB #52 2 years ago

    @Milky

    "fucking pc pirates" referred to the pirates part, not the pc. to clarify: i think pirates on any system are fuckers.

    as to back up my claim:

    [link url=http://2dboy.com/2008 /11/13/90/
    ]http://2dboy.com/2008 /11/13/90/
    [/link]
    [link url=http://kotaku.com/5215528/demigod-18000-custome rs-100000-pirates-[update]
    ]http://ko taku.com/5215528/demigod-18000-...[/link]
    [link url=http://zkwang.wordpress.com/2008/06/29/ pc-piracy-is-1366-billion-dollars/
    ]http://zk wang.wordpress.com/2008/06/29/p...[/link]

    from the last one: "The stats given by Cevat Yerli (CEO of CryTek) was for every 1 PC Game sold, 15-20 copies of the same game is pirated."

    IW themselves complained about the piracy rates of CoD4, but didn't give exact numbers:

    [link url=http://tech report.com/discussions.x/13940
    ]http://tech report.com/discussions.x/13940
    [/link]

    as you can see from those numbers/statements, there's no conspiracy going on here to milk you for DLC money (though i'm sure bobby kotick is happy about that side effect). the sad fact is, unless you have some kind of way to combat piracy (and DRM is a total fail at that), pc games are becoming less and less profitable.

  • BritishBlue1 #53 2 years ago

    Activision slowly tying up the PC sector into their own propriety matchmaking servers...next stop, subscriptions...I hope everybody's brought some lube. :)

  • RedSparrows #54 2 years ago

    Not surprised to see, yet again, platform ownership being equated with intelligence. Get over yourselves.

    In other news, gg Acti, pissing off a large section of your audience.

  • DeltaSixToo #55 2 years ago

    MatchMaking / Homehosted doesnt work for Pc ...Proof ? GRID , Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising , Call of Duty: World at War Multiplayer,Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Vegas 2 and many more i cant be ask too list...

    All these games lag on a pc because Upload speed have yet too evolve to T1 and Pc gamers know the only sollution to consistancy in online gameplay / ingameworld state is Using Dedicated Servers.

    the limitation is this .... ( console or pc ) Home User Hosting max 1mb upload Speed ...( Pc ) Dedicated Server Upload speed is 100mb unlimited ...so anyone can see that the use of dedicated servers is essential too PC and Console as Dedi allows 99% improvement too the steady online gameplay, oppossed to using an Internet Server Provider as the source.

    Console seems happy too host a server below 1% of the ideal potential of the dedicated server.

    There is too much going on in Modern Warfare 2 to update the gaming world ( in game real time ) to every player.

    Most games that are HomeHosted or have MatchMaking do have Lan capabitlitys , so the likes of Lan competative still play on.

    One thing should be a worry for IWD is reverse programming Modern Warfare 2 too allow dedi's and too be pirated to allow Pc gamers for what they need....Which would probably require no cd key and UAC , Pb run scripts for anti cheat ....which was done on CS:S for the few elite that knew and ran css with purple/pink Vac loading screens in 2002 and still probably do

  • Quickstick4 #56 2 years ago

    I agree with some of the points made here
    -PC gaming needs/will change but NOT because of the players. Dev studios want more info on how their game is played, more control over what happens and less piracy and the shit part: Charge for DLC. They want it to be as easy and simple as console gaming and are forcing PC gamers in a direction that the players dont want to go.

    However if this doens't happen, i think we will see less support for major titles in the future on PC.

    Valve normally hit the mark by using steam and ofering games such as team fortress 2, that have very little content when released, but with the promise of more content in the future, and they always deliver for Free.

    I think steam is a great way of stopping piracy, because it also allows you to play the game on multiple computers legaly with no hastle, and every body has the same updates and runs the same version of the game.

    I also think that it didn't help when Robert Bowling (FourZeroTwo) broke the news he had absolutly no idea how the PC comunity works, he always kept saying "I played that game on a console". I dont think he plays any games on PC

  • jools #57 2 years ago

    No sale thanks. I hate match making. Let me play against who I want to play against not against opponents chosen by some logarithm

    and none of them algorithms either!
    Edited by 2 at 19/10/09 @ 16:32

  • NorfolkNClue #58 2 years ago

    Jools - don't you mean algorithm?

  • jools #59 2 years ago

    @Norfolk'n'Clue Most probably *checks* Yes, yes I do. Doh....

    But anyway, no to matchmaking. I endured it for DOW II when I could search for a game and not just go make a cuppa but also manage to get perhaps a simple meal made and still be back in time for it to start.

    Actually using your dedicated L4D servers was such a faff with steamgroups and IDs. We don't want that we want to play on the dedicated servers we setup without hassle. As it was we'd be put onto some random server with a terrible ping whilst randoms filled up the server we were running. By the time it was sorted properly we'd lost interest and moved on.

    Matchmaking makes Jools a sad puppy.
    Edited by 1 at 19/10/09 @ 16:32

  • DeltaSixToo #60 2 years ago

    PC brought IWD/activision its income ....console users that think different heres the stats

    PC
    Call of Duty
    Call of Duty (Deluxe Edition)
    Call of Duty (Game of the Year Edition)
    Call of Duty (Limited Edition Box Set)
    Call of Duty 2
    Call of Duty 2 (Demo Disc)
    Call of Duty 2 (Collector's Edition)
    Call of Duty 2 (Game of the Year Edition)
    Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
    Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (Game of The Year Edition)
    Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (Limited Collector's Edition)
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (Harden Edition)
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (Prestige Edition)
    Call of Duty: Warchest

    PlayStation 3
    Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
    Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (Game of The Year Edition)
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (Harden Edition)
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (Prestige Edition)

    TBA
    Infinity Ward Project [untitled]

    Xbox 360
    Call of Duty 2
    Call of Duty 2 (Game of the Year Edition)
    Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
    Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (Game of The Year Edition)
    Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (Limited Collector's Edition)
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (Harden Edition)
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (Prestige Edition)

  • YourMessageHere #61 2 years ago

    That's it IW, piss the PC market off even more. Then sales will drop and you can get the shareholders to veto more COD games on PC, then use them as an excuse for the frothing fans when you drop PC development altogether, freeing up more cash for marketing console versions.

    This is like eliminating unfair advantages in F1 by making everyone drive Ford Fiestas. Bagpuss puts it...indelicately, but he's right. Consoles have had a big negative impact on PC games; for FPS games especially. Apart from the fact that every game that either starts off on a console and gets ported to PC or is developed for both is significantly easier because it has to accomodate gamepads, the "training wheels you can't remove" version of the multiplayer experience means that console-only people take matchmaking as the norm, whereas for people who grew up with PC multiplayer, the randomness, and the good and bad aspects of that, of a public server, or the pleasing experience of finding a well-moderated server that's got a good ping with a good maplist and a relative paucity of annoying wankers, which you can then simply distribute the IP of to your friends. A huge part of the enduring attraction of PC gaming is the ability of players to tweak the user experience; this takes that away and makes it almost entirely about what peripheral you want to play the game with.

    I for one have no interest in matchmaking, I do that in real life, because I only play MP with friends. I would far rather play someone I actually know who's at a different skill level than a stranger that the game thinks is about as good as me.

    Also, this has nothing to do with piracy, for the simple reason that every software pirate knows that only total fuckwits play pirated games online, given that usually you can't.

  • JahB #62 2 years ago

    Also, this has nothing to do with piracy, for the simple reason that every software pirate knows that only total fuckwits play pirated games online, given that usually you can't.

    http://tech report.com/discussions.x/13940

    Try again.

    From Robert Bowling, the same guy quoted in the EG article:

    "On another PC related note, we pulled some disturbing numbers this past week about the amount of PC players currently playing Multiplayer (which was fantastic). What wasn't fantastic was the percentage of those numbers who were playing on stolen copies of the game on stolen / cracked CD keys of pirated copies (and that was only people playing online)."
    Edited by 1 at 19/10/09 @ 17:18

  • makeamazing #63 2 years ago

    @Buran, Mate I was once a PC primary player, had a PS1 and Ps2 but had hardly any games on it. Times are changing, people work on PCs all day and they dont generally want to sit on one at home, rather be on a comfy sofa. I have a top range PC, but most of the top games come out on consoles first.

    Yes you can say WOW is massive etc etc, but sooner or later even MMOs will make it to consoles and I will bet you that the next WOW or whatever from Blizzard will move across.

    So you can name a few games that still get PC releases, but tell me the truth, if you think the PC market is anything like it was 5 years ago, you are truely deluded. Im not just saying "PC games doom" but you have to be realistic, its just not where it was and games companies dont look at it in the same way.

    Last PC game I played was Total war, and thats a game you would think should NEVER be on the consoles, but even the developers suggested they were looking at ways of moving the game onto consoles.

    On one of the other posts someone posted the top 40 games sales, take a look, its interesting reading: [link url=http://www.chart-track.co. uk/index.jsp?c=p/software/uk/latest/index_test.jsp&ct=110032
    ]http://ww w.chart-track.co.uk/index.jsp?c...[/link] If you think that is good for PC, then there is no hope :D
    Edited by 1 at 19/10/09 @ 17:35

  • Salaminizer #64 2 years ago

    the rest of the gaming scene will be running their games, opening the server list and joining the server, knowing that the Confused Charmander, Takuma Sato and other awesome nicknames from the other day will again be there. and if not them, the other hundred players that join the same servers every day and obviously won't add 200 players to their "friends" list. and one of the games from the "rest of the gaming scene" will be COD4:MW, which will still have a lot of dedicated servers that won't migrate to MW2 because they won't be able to.

  • Buran #65 2 years ago

    @makeamazing:

    1-I can play in a comfy sofa my PC games in my 46" 1080p plasma in the same way I play it in my 20" Viewsonic, because the center table in my living room can be lifted both to place popcorn and cofee or to place a bluetooth Logitech keyboard and mouse, that in fact is what I do -even in UT III in PS3-. But if any doesn't have a liftable center table, most of current PC games supports pads to play confy -anyway, in the online of fps games any pad player wil be raped in matter of seconds-.

    2-I'm not interest today in current MMOs in PCs, but in consoles the controls probably will not work well ever. Any decent MMORPG will be launched in PC with better graphics, support and price. Anyway, MMORPGs is a inmense PC market that consoles simply doesn't have, in the same way that platform and fighting games are console territory and rts PC territory.

    3-You're highly underestimating the PC sales in services as Steam, Direct2Drive, Metaboli, EA store, Blizzard Store... What of those services are taked into consideration in the RETAIL charts of UK sales? No one. Valve, Blizzard, EA... are making tons of money in online distribution with full games and content that aren't displayed in the NPD sales, but you can easily see the HIGH impact of the PC earnings in the YTY dossiers they send in the spring reports.

    4-Man, I was once mainly a PSX player, but the only two console games in this year that I'm really interested this 2009 are KZ2, WipEOut HD Fury and Tekken 6. Not a bad list, but I still spent more time with Dawn Of War series, Crysis Wars, ArmA II and Diablo II LOD than in PS3+ Xbox 360 combined. Serach my Xfire profile: [link url=http://www.xfir e.com/profile/buran01/
    ]http://www.xfir e.com/profile/buran01/
    [/link]

    5-But not last: Starcraft II, Diablo III, Battlefield 3, The Witcher 2, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 (plus all the multis as Crysis 2 and BF: Bad Company 2) that I'll play in PC.

    PC gaming isn't dead, is undead! and as Lovecraft said you can't kill what may lie forever.

  • Pablo2k5 #66 2 years ago

    This is a fucking disgrace.

    That is all I have to say.

  • Chufty #67 2 years ago

    What a crock of shit. CoD turned into a console series long ago anyway.

    What's the news on LAN gaming?

  • rochyroch #68 2 years ago

    I won't be buying, i'm sure its about control & money.

    at this rate you will have to watch a five minute advert for tampax inbetween rounds.

  • Shakey_Jake33 #69 2 years ago

    Even if they (arguable) have legitimate reasons for doing this, it does seem like they're bending over backwards to give people reasons not to be interested in the game (pricing, delaying the PC version, etc., even those rumours of subscription that thankfully never came to fruition). If it was another game, I suspect people would be cancelling preorders over something like this. It being Modern Warfare 2, people will (not unreasonably) buy it anyway regardless of the drawbacks. Which does give further credibility to Kottick's claim that people would buy it however it was priced. I know this isn't to do with pricing, but I'm simply demonstrating the fact that people won't be put off so easily.

    All we need is an announcement that they're going to use SecuROM with a three machine activation and that's all they can do.

  • Spekingur #70 2 years ago

    Putting all the blame on piracy is somewhat naive, isn't it?

  • DeltaSixToo #71 2 years ago

    yes espeacially for IWD/ACTIVISION because any cod4 player knows that theres countless of players being banned by PB for cheating and going and buying a 2nd or 3rd copy of COD4 too replaced there banned Guid /cdkey which is why COD4 is still making money too this day!!!

    Or am i wrong?
    Edited by 1 at 19/10/09 @ 21:24

  • timberwolf #72 2 years ago

    oh dear... not enough control or money. it's scary that either they don't expect a backlash or they don't care.
    Edited by 2 at 20/10/09 @ 04:58

  • clockworkzombie #73 2 years ago

    I do not use a PC for gaming as I prefer consoles. I do understand the anger however.

    Saturday the 17/10 I purchased a PS3 and CoD WaW too so that I can play with a bunch of real life friends already on the PS3. I already have the game on the xbox and the difference in matchmaking for me is incredible. I am trying to level up to be somewhere near my friends levels when we play on friday night.

    Team deathmatch on PS3 in unplayable, one red dot for the most part, best I have had is 3 yellow bars for a couple of hours. Pathetic. There must not be enough aussies playing it whereas on the 360 I can usually get an excellent nights gaming in though I may need an hour or so to hit a good server.

    If the PC dudes are going to have to put up with what I have experienced they will not be happy bunnies. Lag, obnoxious rude players complaining about snipers & campers and berating people for not running and gunning, not being given the option to start your own server room and wait for it to fill up with players with the same network quality. The rude player thing happens on both consoles for sure, on the PS3 I have to put up with it if I want any sort of game.

    I fully expect most of the PC dudes will continue to play CoD MW.

    My PS3 experience has done one thing. I now wonder at the value of my gold subscription for the 360, the online gaming is better but I am not sure it is $80.00 AU per year better.

    This week has REALLY brought home how much it sucks to have to host the games on your own console. I so want to play the game without lag and with all my fellow players to not have lag also. The game is so much more fun when this occasionally almost accidentally happens.

  • sneetch #74 2 years ago

    Asked how he saw the Modern Warfare PC community two or three months down the line, he said: "I think that's going to be much more like the rest of the gaming scene, where you have your sites where you congregate and you discuss and you set up matches and you schedule, and then you jump into a private match and you invite everybody in, and you do your clan games there.

    "Much more than how it currently is in PC where you have your clan... everything's ran by... you have complete control. This is much more of a communal thing."

    I would challenge his assertion that this way is "more of a communal thing" than the old, standard PC way; for a start, I don't think that a group comprising all the players in the world is a particularly good "community"; you're just one faceless user amongst millions.

    In my own experience with clans, they tend to form from a bunch of people who regularly played on a particular server or group of servers, enjoyed it and decided to start gaming together. The sites and organisation of clan matches and so on tends to come after that. Existing clans will be fine but I think we'll see fewer new ones forming.

    With dedicated, regular servers you get to know the other regulars but without them and with this matchmaking method it's incredibly unlikely that you'll be playing with the same people again as different people improve at different rates and even if you happen to remain at the same level as everyone you played with the chances of encountering those people again is pretty tiny.

    It's like the difference between a local pub and a busy, city-centre bar.

  • YourMessageHere #75 2 years ago

    @ JahB

    Note first that in your Techreport link, Bowling gives no numbers whatsoever. The way he words it basically means that he could literally mean any number. This proves nothing. Combine this and his handling of the dedicated server thing, which (as others have also pointed out) makes him sound very much like he knows nothing about it, and I see no compelling reason to trust anything he says. I read that he just said "fourzerotwo: Definitely made a big wave, and the response will not be ignored. I'll ensure everyone at IW sees the petitions and responses to it." on twitter, which is also in line with the whole 'not giving out any actual facts or statements' line he has chosen to follow and makes him that much easier to distrust.

    Also, those other links you gave - the Kotaku one is interestingly footnoted with an update that essentially says "oh, actually, this is nothing like what we said it was originally", and the one with Cevat Yerli essentially goes on to say that Yerli's argument is bollocks (quite apart from the ridiculous way crysis was sold, i.e. as something nobody's PC was actually capable of running properly at launch - he might just as well have directly said "look, you might as well grab this off a torrent or something, because god knows if there's any point in paying good cash if it's so high-spec it won't run";). Seems like you're trying to prove that numerous developers love talking blatant bullshit about piracy in order to obfuscate their own mistakes. Granted I know next to nothing about Demigod, but Crytek badly missold Crysis, and IW are right at this moment reaping what they sow with their hiked prices and now this daft decision.

  • Buran #76 2 years ago

    @clockworkzombie:

    Your post is full of fail. All games in Xbox 360 are played in p2p hosting as in most of the PS3 games. But first parties games from Sony are supported by dedicated servers. This is the reason because fps shooters as Killzone 2, Resistance 1 & 2 and MAG beta can support up to 32, 40. 60 and even 256 players with a minimal lag and good ping. This is also, the reason because Soul Calibur IV matchmaking sucks in both consoles -p2p hosting- and Halo 3 matchmaking is much worse compared to UT III -which also uses dedicated servers in both PC version and consoles.

    Without the 14.000 dedicated servers, funded by clans, that supports the 99,9% of the COD 4 players -not only the affiliated or the "pro", but all the players online-, MW 2 in PC will be the lameful experience provided by Gears Of Wars 2: low population, laggy response, high ping, small to none coordination between teammates.

    COD 4 uses 50% more servers that WoW, and IW will replace the successful model employed in almost all fps online in PC since Quake for the shity system employed in OF2 and Gears. Epic Fail.

  • clockworkzombie #77 2 years ago

    @Buran
    Nowhere did I say the 360 WaW is run differently than the PS3, I did say the experience on the 360 is better and suggested the lack of local players to be the issue when explaining the difference, indeed you would have to be imbecilic to not know that MW and WaW are hosted locally as it was such a big deal when host migration code was added.

    If there were dedicated servers hosting games on both the 360 and PS3 then a lot of us would be very happy indeed.

    For example when playing a game and there are 7 Australians and 1 American the American has bad ping. After several games it migrates the server and of course the American gets to be host so then the 7 Australians have bad ping. A friend tells me this happens on the PS3 too.

    Which is why I would like to see network quality being the main criteria for server selection. You can still make a party with your friends and if there are enough of you, you will start your own room as opposed to joining someone else's room.

    Good for Sony having their own servers this does not help with Call of Duty though.