Modern Warfare 2!!

[Unsullied_Spy]

It's a good game, no doubt, but unless the single player is good I wouldn't pay $60 for it. Multiplayer was nothing spectacularly different from CoD 4 or CoD WaW. They are turning the CoD series into a more tactical Galo 3, what i mean by that is they keep re-releasing the same freakin' game and charging stupid money for it. When online play starts to peter out they will release 3 or 4 new maps to try to bolster the popularity again then they will release another CoD game with very similar gameplay.

[nitrostarter]

Originally Posted by Unsullied_Spy

It's a good game, no doubt, but unless the single player is good I wouldn't pay $60 for it. Multiplayer was nothing spectacularly different from CoD 4 or CoD WaW. They are turning the CoD series into a more tactical Galo 3, what i mean by that is they keep re-releasing the same freakin' game and charging stupid money for it. When online play starts to peter out they will release 3 or 4 new maps to try to bolster the popularity again then they will release another CoD game with very similar gameplay.

Ding ding ding! We have a winner! But somehow, I keep spending the $60 on the new ones...

[sikeston34m]

Originally Posted by Unsullied_Spy

It's a good game, no doubt, but unless the single player is good I wouldn't pay $60 for it. Multiplayer was nothing spectacularly different from CoD 4 or CoD WaW. They are turning the CoD series into a more tactical Galo 3, what i mean by that is they keep re-releasing the same freakin' game and charging stupid money for it. When online play starts to peter out they will release 3 or 4 new maps to try to bolster the popularity again then they will release another CoD game with very similar gameplay.

<--------is Wildcards on COD4


I'm still pretty hooked on it.

[Havoc]

They should have never released it on PC, period. Their BS excuses for ripping all the good things out didn't fool any true PC gamer.

PC gaming got away from client only based networking for gaming when the internet became a viable option. Before that, IPX/SPX over a LAN was perfect, really no need for dedicated servers at that time. True player run gaming servers began popping up in the mid-late 90's for games that supported them. Games began allowing more and more people and bad connections did not (necessarily) mess with other people's gaming experience. Pretty soon every game with any kind of deathmatch, team deathmatch, CTF, etc. had some kind of dedicated server option. I think some of the biggest matches I was ever in were 32x32. This gave birth to clans and competitive gaming across the world. You had a choice of what kind of server to play on whenever you wanted. Times were great and got better with every year. (Please note that I was just making a VERY quick summary)

And now we have Call of Money: Modern Rapefare 2. 9x9 is the max for multiplayer games? No dedicated server? No server browsing? A POS match-making service meant for console gamers? This kills your freedom to play how you want, when you want, period. They claim it was to make the game more accessible, however, anyone with a high double-digit IQ and a decent connection can find a good server. I realize some people like match-making services and that is perfectly fine, but plenty do not. Here is a novel idea, PUT IN BOTH!! Instead of removing options, just add more!! Appeal to the masses by answering to both the novice and the expert, don't dumb everything down to the least common denominator.

I know they *CLAIM* to have done this to cut down on piracy and cheating. Cool, well, people are already cheating and the game was already pirated within a day of release. Steam DRM is a joke just like any other DRM measure. Steam is great for people who prefer to buy games online, but I am sick of seeing it used as DRM for my store bought games. Die already, please!!

The simple truth was the game was made for consoles and ported to the PC. The dedicated server option was scrapped so people could no longer control content on their servers which in turn puts IW/Activision in control of everything. So, what does that mean? More money since they control all the development tools and means of distribution. Player made mods are dead, did I mention that? Some of the best games started as 3rd party mods!!

I have no doubt the game is fun and for anyone that bought it and likes it, good for you. I refuse to support IW and Activision now, and if this trend continues, PC gaming will die. Seriously, what is the point of a $3000 gaming computer when the experience is EXACTLY the same on a $300 console? I own a 360, a Wii and almost every console back to the Atari 2600. I love console gaming, but it has it's place, just like PC gaming. A lot of games can work on both, but the experience is different and needs to be.

And for any follow up flames, which thankfully, this is a nice forum and I probably won't hear any:

"No, I can't make a better game"
"No, piracy is not causing this trend, piracy has been around since the BBS days"
"No, piracy is not getting worse, it is growing proportionally with the population of the gaming community"
"No, I didn't buy the game"
"No, I don't care if I am whining, if consumer's don't speak up, we will never get what we want"
"And finally, I don't care if this was the game IW wanted to make, that is a cop-out excuse and holds no water"

Watch out PC Gamers, Activision is screwing our options in Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3. LAN play has already been removed.