10-4, I only paid 0$ for both cod 4 and CoD5
Printable View
10-4, I only paid 0$ for both cod 4 and CoD5
presents?Quote:
Originally Posted by Veho Nex
so at this point you owe them $120.....pay up with CoD 6!!!:laugh4:
Truly.. this is not the game I fell in love with.
Reports are coming out that PC multiplayer will be restricted to 9v9 matches. What in the heck? Are you telling me the massive brawl fest, 'nade spamming, kill 25 people with a single air strike servers are... gone? Now that may not have been some people's thing, but you could have always played on the server size that was right for you. That was the beauty of the PC market!
This is very.. very disappointing. :help: Some say since the maps are smaller and more focused, it'll feel the same and still be pretty satisfying. Personally I am very skeptical.
:furious3: It will cost over $100 when it comes out here, I will be waiting 6 months until the price has dropped and then buy it when it's $60 :shame:Quote:
Originally Posted by Veho Nex
While I have to say that Xbox and PS3 have always been limited to matches of 12 (unless its a smaller server or big team matchmaking, which only bumps it to 18), that does kinda ruin it for the computer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monk
That has always been a big highlight of multiplayer PC games: "We have more human interaction!!!"
that really sucks. anyone remember Frontlines: Fuel of War with it's 64 player online PC matches? Oh the lag!
Yes i always thought that was what the console could boast. Fewer players, more controlled chaos, less chance of lag.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prussian Iron
However I loved the insane matches on the PC. Get 25 people on each team and just watch the mayhem! You could have three distinct fights going on in the same map and each could have direct effects on the others. If your connection could handle it and you didn't mind spawning in a grenade every now and then, it was great fun.
Like i said.. IF is saying maps this go around are much smaller and more focused. So maybe 9v9 will be fine for that setting? I dunno. :shrug:
i dunno....i remember seeing a multiplayer preview of one map and it was fairly large; in fact, perfect for 14 v 14.
ill try and re-find it.
More info from infinity ward, that makes you wonder if any of them play games on a computer:
Quote:
Q: Is there a console in the PC version of the game, so we can change our field of view from the xbox's default 65 FOV to 80 also can we tweaks the weapon damage for each gun, removes perks, graphical debris, breathing sway, also thru console like we where able to before or is this all gone?
Vince-IW: We would like you to play the game the way we designed and balanced it.
Seriously. "Oh, we didn't have nades, they would ruin the balance. And we only have one gun because more would ruin the elegant balance of our game."Quote:
Infinity Ward says the maps are balanced for only nine players per side, but they also say there is no lean in the game because the game "isn't balanced for lean." Remember, you can easily answer any inconvenient questions by saying it would ruin the game's balance.
And the grand winner for most oblivious quote from a PR man goes to...Mackey and the whole IW team!Quote:
This is, for all intents and purposes, a console game that plays on your PC. You won't be able to make any tweaks, you can't adjust anything, and even better? You won't be able to make recordings of your matches. The question in the chat showed just how far the gulf between what gamers want and what Infinity Ward is giving them has become. "Is there a /record feature? Answer yes... please. We're trying to give you a 'chance'," the gamer asked. The answer was a simple "No."
:dizzy2:Quote:
DudezTY: Since we cannot kick people in ranked matches, how will we stop hackers who get past VAC?
Mackey-IW: Our goal is to ban hackers from the game.
Wow. They want to prevent people from cheating and are so arrogant that they don't allow for any failsafe.
And to top it off, listen to the PC exclusive features:
Wow, how amazing! Revolutionary stuff there. Graphics settings! Take that, original 386 version of Lemmings! Or, wait, could you change resolution in that game?Quote:
Moriarte: Ignoring IW.net, is the PC version a direct port of the console version?
Mackey-IW: No, PC has custom stuff like mouse control, text chat in game, and graphics settings.
And 9v9? If I ever see one of the devs I am going to beat them about the head with tribes 2.
CR
Clearly, Mackey-IF has never played on a VAC enabled server. Hackers do get through, it's inevitable. With no chance to ban them from ranked servers this is just sounding rediculous.
Does IF plan to have a full-time support staff able to respond to thousands of "There's a hacker in game #45327, please ban him!" at any given time of day? I hope so, because without server side ability to kick hackers that's what they'll need. It isn't like the consoles where it's one idiot in a few thousand sporting a mod-chip... This is the PC. Here there be monsters.
edited for:
Preach, brother! Not to mention t2 had all the things IF is denying us and vehicles.. and jetpacks.. and.. guns that could make explosions the size of a small building. So many memories.Quote:
Originally Posted by CR
I hate people who use those cheat machines.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monk
however 2 of my friends are amazingly fast shooters with most guns in WaW, with any cnotroller, with no controller mods. they often get mod blocked. it is crazy as hell though!!!
Another pebble added to the pile that's building on top of this game:
Since people are talking about the game's price, it's £54.99 here. That's £14.99 higher than the current RRP, which is in and of itself higher now than it was when the announcement was made.Quote:
Digital distributors Direct2Drive, Impulse and Gamersgate have decided not to sell Modern Warfare 2, as the game requires installation of Valve's Steamworks tools.
"We don't believe games should force the user to install a Trojan Horse," D2D told Kotaku.
Steamworks was announced for Modern Warfare 2 just weeks ago. Infinity Ward's mammoth shooter is Valve's most glamorous supporter yet. The tools fulfil an array of functions: game authentication, auto-patches, updates, achivements, anti-cheating and persistent player saves via the Steam Cloud.
But D2D - unhappy with the forced installation of software from its rival - will continue to boycott Steamworks games until Valve "decouples its retail marketplace" from the tools. Source
The arrogance at play with this game is astounding. I'd love it see it fall flat on its face at retail, though I know it won't.
wow. in so little time they completely :daisy: up:
-the game for PC players
-Digital Distribution
-Pricing
-What people think about a certain campaign mission
-Any chance that it will go down in video game history like CoD 4 did.
is that about right?
COD4 has held its price better than any other game I can think of. It was still full price in most places a year after release, and is still well above the level you would expect for a two year old game today. Why is that possible? Because of the multiplayer. The audience they are upsetting most with their decisions.
The situation has potential to develop into a circle of doom. People are being put off buying at launch by the announcements and the price, which means the MP scene will be a little weaker. The decisions themselves seem to run contrary to what many fans want, which puts the MP scene in far greater danger. If the MP scene is weaker than it's more likely to fade. If the MP scene fades then the game won't hold its price point as COD4 did. Before you know it the game's in the bargin section and has a bad reputation.
Far from repeating COD4's success the game could collapse under its own weight. It's not hard to imagine; COD5 didn't manage to replicate COD4's success.
Anyone else also perturbed by their ad? The one brought to you by
Fight
Against
Grenade
Spam?
Well you can't really replicate the success of a game using basically the same engine with tanks added. CoD 5 I like better for Nazi Zombies. if CoD 6 had brought like Terrorist zombies, than I think everybody would g from CoD 5 to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by frogbeastegg
??? never heard of/seen it.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Very Super Market
all i know is that im waiting a long time - maybe even after i get back from my service in the IDF, about 3 years - until the price drops, which it probably will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by miotas
its all in good fun. i mean, who is actually going to be offended by that? so he said (spoiler'd for not knowing if its allowed or not. if its not please remove it)Quote:
Originally Posted by A Very Super Market
and ****. and yes, F.A.G.S spells...well we all know what it spells. i dont see anything wrong with it.Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
i found it a little funny actually.
*prepares to be flamed*
Well, gay gamers, as in people who play games and are gay, might not like the implication behind the ad.
CR
does this mean that female gamers all hate god of war, or prince of persia (both with nude women)? no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
i wouldn't be offended by it, just like if they had instead made the acronym J.E.W.S. its not really a slur against gays even.....now its more of an insult against people we dont like, as opposed to only gays.
Quote:
the definition's history is explained as well as how the word is changing to no longer define homosexuals and transvestites by today's youth.
Well, games are getting more expensive to make. Intense competition ,graphically (Since that's seen as the biggest definer of quality by laymen) drives up costs by a huge amount, along with the Hollywood-isation of the games industry, in an attempt to be taken "seriously", means that a PS3 game costs ten times as much to make as a PS2 game. This means that games now have to:Quote:
Originally Posted by frogbeastegg
1. Reduce the amount of content in games, so production time is shorter, and costs are lower. You've probably noticed that games which would previously have been thirty hour epochs are now eight hour strolls in the park.
2. Pay programmers/modelers/etc. buttons
3. Generally be sequels or spin offs; why take a risk with a new franchise, when you could grind out the same old mush to the same old audience?
4. Raise the cost of games
The last one is the most controversial, because games companies still want to be seen as chummy, community driven companies. Yet charging £50 for a game is seen to be ripping of their fans (This is ignoring the fact that N64 games for example used to routinely cost £50 such as Majora's Mask, and Donkey Kong 64; And I needed an Expansion Pack for both!). So, there are other ways around it, such as DLC, subscriptions, Special Editions, etc.
Don't worry, I'm not criticising you for being angry at such an extortionate price. There's not much we can do about it as individuals.
It's not a very tasteful advert; nonetheless discussion of it is rather close to backroom material.
MW2's price is something of an academic matter for me as I've no intention of buying it, it's not my kind of game. It attracts my interest mainly as an observer. Recently the side which says cheaper games = more sales = more money has been slightly the stronger of the two, and games last year were perhaps the cheapest they have been in a long time. MW2 firmly boots the ball back towards the camp of 'exploit the early adopters for as much as possible, then drop the price later.'
Whether it's going to be a mostly isolated blip or the start of a new market trend remains to be seen. Games prices at launch are cyclical; some years new games cost a fortune, others they are cheaper. The game's price is doing some different things to the high street market. The supermarkets are all set to wade in and sell it in bulk and at a loss. Specialist game shops are scrambling to offer the game in a way which makes it appear more affordable without causing them to make a loss on each copy. The online shops don't appear to be doing anything differently to usual.
Thus MW2 is a game to watch.
While I have quite a few thoughts on the state of modern gaming, pricing, and evolution most of them are too off-topic to post here. I don't agree that - overall and speaking generally - games are getting shorter, for one thing. MW2's singleplayer mode will take a similar amount of time to the singleplayer modes in the decade old FPS I used to play, which is to say around 8 hours. N64 games were criticised as being too expensive back when the system was new. Much as I loved mine, I knew the expense of the cartridges for both developers and gamers held it back.
That's about right, yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prussian Iron
This is something that started with the dedicated server fiasco. That, for many, was a travesty and they went up in arms. As someone who has played in a system without dedicated servers (consoles) I can tell you that it's not that big of a deal.. on its own.
Now we're looking at the very things that make PC multiplayer possible being denied to us, no way for host to kick hackers? 9v9 matches? A price that is $10 more than any other PC game on the market (for no reason other than to do it, i might add)? I have no doubt that MW2 for xbox and ps3 will be every bit as good as COD4, but I cannot say the same about the PC port.
Let's face it, that's what we PC gamers are getting.. a console port. And I for one am not thrilled about it. :shame:
$60 for a PC game? or $50? $50 is the norm for new pc games. 60 would be outrageous!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Monk
i only payed 20 bucks for my Halo 2 Vista: one of the best 20 bucks ive ever spent. far superior to the xbox version in many ways. why? they made it just for the PC. they even had a different company taking it on.
MW2 for the PC will cost $60, just like any console game. :no:Quote:
Originally Posted by Prussian Iron
I'm less offended than I am surprised at IW's juvenile sense of humour. Making a "funny" word with an acronym or having a baseball player call people names doesn't strike me as very inspired marketing.
Words may be words, but the worst we can do is turn a racial or social slur into a generic term for "jerk"
thats insane!!!! and you dont even get anything extra. I say if they charge that much than get it on the Xbox or PS3. they should still have that big team playlist (i think it was called War in WaW) and you get better graphics. and more control. and....a bigger screen (hopefully)Quote:
Originally Posted by Monk
I'm going to skip this one it seems... :shrug:
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2...ou-thought.ars
Nice little article by Ars Technica on PC-MW2.
The paranoia-cynical part of me thinks this is Activision and IW's way of making CoD franchise console-only.
I was actually considering getting this game for the multiplayer aspect, but after all this stuff I can easily say forget it. I got other games to play.
Off to play Arma2...
And the best bit? They'll almost certainly pump out loads of DLC as well. That's it, milk the lemmings for all they're worth...Quote:
Originally Posted by Prussian Iron