Modern Warfare 2 PC Multiplayer Capped At 9v9

More bad news

http://kotaku.com/5397149/modern-warfare-2-pc-multiplayer-capped-at-9v9

Now its a exactly like the console version now no point buying it for PC anymore

Back to COD4 multiplayer where all the fun is at

 

Still can't wait though... pre-order in!

 

What I think would be hilarious is that because the first game actually allows mods, that the community will transfer the assets such as maps, weapons, etc. from the sequel to the first game.

This is certainly going to increase the MP life of the first game.

I wonder why they announced all this bad news for the PC version so close to launch instead of months before? Because they know their actions will tick off PC gamers.

This game now has console features at a $60 console price. Why not lock the game at 600P resolution like the console versions too?

 

You guys realize that $60 dollar's is going to the be the norm?? Pc dev. cost is going up AND prices have been the same since the 90's, inflation alone dictates the price needs to go up at some point just to keep up..... this has been a long time coming, I really think ya'll need to accept $60 dollar games is just how its gonna be... infact they prolly should of raised prices a few years ago...

 

Well, I still don't own COD4...So, I am really excited for the game price to drop sometime soon. Once it hits $20 or below, I will purchase!

I am excited for people to copy the new maps to the old game! This will increase how long the game will be good for.

Seriously, I was so ready to drop $60.00 on this game until all of this bad news for PC gamers. Oh well, their loss...not mine!

 

CoD4 was $23.99 all weekend on Steam...

 

This is BS >.< I was really looking forward to this game...I was even willing to pay the $10 extra for it...but no dedicated servers...and only 9v9 multiplayer? Forget it....i'd rather buy a second copy of Dragon Age....at least Bioware respects their fanbase...

 

9v9. That makes for smaller maps.

 

we aren't too concerned with the price in general. it's more the direction of the game.

 

I hate the large games that I get into - it just a massive cluster (bad word). Not fun. I am glad to see the smaller maps, though, I would have been fine to just go find one on my own.

 

This may popularize the other multiplayer modes, like Cap the flag.

Rather than Team Deathmatch all day everyday.

 

Then can you explain to me games like Batman: Arkham Asylum, Dragon Age: Origins, Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising which are on the PC and console.

Why are these still $50 on PC and $60 on consoles in an age that development costs truly are high?

 

lol you say that like it's a bad thing.
i agree with you, but it's still desirable to see the OPTION of more players.

 

After playing L4D, I'm all for a deeper Coop model. I've been playing team Deathmatch since the days of Quake. It starts to get old.

 

No dedicated servers, no mods, and a capped 9v9 multiplayer the game is not even worth $60 bucks and its exactly like the console version and its no point to buy the PC version now. Its funny that they waited until a few weeks before the game is released to tell us there will be no dedicated servers

Maybe in a few months they will realize that they made a mistake when the PC version sales are very low and they decided to add dedicated servers and mods you never know then the game will be worth the $60 bucks

 

Actually this is quite wrong. The pc as a platform has NO ROYALTY costs. On the consoles royalty fees are ridiculously high, since the main method of profit for consoles IS from the royalties from the games. They could sell the game on PC for about $40 and make the same as a $60 game on a console. If development costs were their reason, than the console versions would be $80+ to recoup the losses from the royalty fees.

What the heck are you talking about inflation? There's no inflation on dev costs, and there's no inflation on the PC as a platform. If anything developers are getting paid LESS, so profits would only be higher.

I didn't actually think what they were doing with IWnet could be true, but EVERY single thing that I thought they wouldn't possibly do, they announced they did. Such as the 100% p2p, randomly forcing random players to host a game even if they don't want to, insanely limited matches, 18 max players and you can't even kick griefers!? If what I read was correct, games will be forced to use REFLECT friendly fire. this is even MORE griefable than regular friendly fire! It also promotes extreme carelessness. I hate reflect FF servers! Throw a nade, some griefer intentionally runs up and stands on it and waits for it to kill YOU.

I swear, every single day I find ANOTHER reason to hate this game, and hate this developer.

 

Well I pretty much canceled my pre-order a week ago with all the terrible things that have been happening. Too bad a massive boycott wouldn't work since so many people want to play the game regardless of the crappy console like experience and the $60 dollar price tag, which would honestly not bother me too much if it wasn't for the fact that Acitivision Blizzard's CEO is a complete money grubbing . Hell I wouldn't be surprised if he put the IW guys up to the new "features" and limitations to the PC version. And as far as copying new maps to CoD4, I have a feeling that they have already heard about what people are trying to do and will make it extremely difficult for modders to do so.

If this is how CoD is going to be from now on, I really don't care if it comes out on the PC or not anymore. Though what I really hope for is IW rescinding what it has done here for the next CoD game, giving us back the freedom we as PC gamers so enjoyed, but I think I should also be incredibly irate at all the PC gamers out their who pirate games. Part of the problem is because of YOU (you know who) and the lack of faith developers have in the PC gaming community. Quit pirating their/our/your games.

 

I'm happy I'm sticking with CoD4 - I just can't justify spending £55 (~$100) on MW2 when it'll have no dedicated servers and only 9v9 - I had MW1 on PC and PS3 and I can't honestly say that not a single time when I play online with the PS3 do I think - "Hey, this removal of dedicated servers was a good move". You get crappy games, no look at pings beforehand, kids playing about and the worst matchmaking system I've seen ever (they don't balance teams well at all).

When they raised the price to £55 they were asking for pirating of the game, so making no dedicated servers is enforcing no-one goes around them to get the game.

So back to ok graphics, good gameplay, >18 man fights and dedicated servers with MW1 methinks. Thanks Activision, you saved me a bunch

 

if you go to coolshop you can get it for £24.99 including postage Clikety Click

 

best price i've seen. +rep.
still not buying it though. dragon age should keep me entertained till next year.

edit: oops

 

how many people could get online at once in Cod4 PC?

 

wow this is pretty bad. i was considering this or l4d 2. im guessing im going to go with l4d 2 instead of getting modern warfare 2 since it doesnt look like modern warefare 2 is worth it anymore. If i see them fix the multiplayer i will buy it but i think im going to go for l4d 2 now.

I dont get why they would develop the fps around the console instead of developing the fps around the pc. Fps on the console is just not as good as fps on the pc. I have no idea what they were thinking when they came up with this idea. Its like the pc version is a port of the console version instead of the other way around.

 

games have been taking this trend more and more for years. don't be so surprised.

 

lol,thanks tianxia.
it was £23.99 up until a week ago

no mater what it still looks awesome.

width='425' height="349"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/E_NZGhHCkX0&border=1&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/E_NZGhHCkX0&border=1&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width='425' height="349"></embed></object>

 

Ars Technica made an article on the whole 9v9 and dedicated serve fiasco. http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2009/11/pc-modern-warfare-2-its-much-worse-than-you-thought.ars

I'll buy the game when the price drop to 29.99. No need for me to buy it at the msrp if they are not even trying to cater to the specificity of the PC gaming microcosm. That trailer looks amazing though.

 

I agree, maybe im weird but i don't find multiplayer modes where you take 3 steps, die, respawn, take 3 steps die, respawn because there's some tosspot spawn camping with much higher levels than everyone, on the rare times i didn't die constantly cod4 multiplayer was fun, for the most part it was just not entertaining for me, personally i prefered the single player side of cod4.


But that's no excuse for having no dedicated servers and a cap at 9 v 9, sorely disappointed at games developers giving PC gamers the dodgy end of the stick.

although i confess i still have MW2 pre-ordered on xbox

 

highlights:

facepalm.

 

I don't know what the official number is but there are servers that are upwards of 50 players. Problem is that most of the maps are really just too small for such high player counts. On the original and second CoDs, 64 players wasn't that big an issue because most of the maps were big enough (hell I desired as many people as possible!), and in some maps like Hurtgen, Rocket, Brecourt in the first two games, they were much better with 64 players. All the maps in CoD: United Offensive are all really big, so the more players the better. 50 players is still alot of fun in CoD4 but it seems like the servers are less adept at handling it than in CoD2, probably because of the combined needs to do players as well as physicallized objects in the game world. I tend to get alot of irking in MP with the game, then you get all the cheap kills thanks to bullet penetration, especially with the "X" hit confirmation sign kind of just guiding your aim as you unload all your ammo into a wall. BF2 has a similar issue with this too, but then again, BF2 I would say is a much more difficult game.

 

wow, your not very smart.

 

I completely disagree, Call of Duty 4 and Call of Duty MW2 are all about multiplayer.. Both have super short single players that can completed in less then a day. The re-playability is all in the multiplayer part of the game, and if you pirate its near impossible to play online.

 

That's not true. There is always a work around via hacking. While I think pirating isn't as big an issue as people make it to be, it's a psychological thing for the devs and publishers. The stigma behind pirating has done it's damage. What IW is doing with CoDMW2 is a way of preventing pirating by tying so many parts of the core components of the online game to outside control. It really does lock things down for them, but not completely. They didn't do it with CoD4 because they didn't think it was going to be pirated to hell. Granted, the PC version still sold upwards of 1 million copies at least in retail IIRC (I wouldn't be surprised if sales were up to 1.5 million with digital downloads included). Of course though, CoD now appeals to a console fanbase because it's built around such sensibilities instead of the PC because they'll sell more there. So why would they appeal to the PC fanbase more instead of putting more resources into the console versions, supplying their needs which happen to buy their games more? Now I can see the PC version of MW2 selling for **** and IW skipping out on PC altogether from now on unless something changes, in which case the next game will still have all the controlling aspects of MW2 instead of the nice freedoms of CoD4 and previous. Only non-MMO game I can think of that probably does a good job of MP piracy prevention is any real Steam based game (those from Valve themselves) and probably BF2 and BF2142, simply because you're creating a permanently existing account that directly accesses an EA server for proper account name and password verification before letting you get onto a dedicated server which itself probably does an authentication check as well. It's a multilayered approach as to just a CD key check that CoD games do, under the guise of a nice account management system, which is very nice unto itself since it tracks stats and character persistence creation.

 

It has NOTHING to do with piracy.

It has EVERYTHING to do with DLC.

They crippled the MP just to sell you $10 map packs.

 

They better step up and put out some good news, like how l4d2 seemed to be crap but when they released their final news about it, it recovered.

Hope they have something good to say to improve the rep of MW2...

 

Well of course. Maybe they'll include a $10 pack to let you have more than 18 players

 

Not exactly you can play on non punkbuster,cracked, and modded servers but they are full of hackers based on experience so i ended up buying it and it was worth it the cash and it was such a awesome game and since people are boycotting MW2 most of the servers are full and new ones are being created every day its like when it first came out

I have a feeling that a lot of people are going to pirate MW2 just to play single player since the multiplayer now sucks without dedicated servers, server admins, capped 18 player multiplayer,etc. I am borrowing MW2 from a friend to try it out but i wont buy it because its not worth it unless you buy it for XBOX360 or PS3 which i dont have