KlykaDO you have anySPARE BATTERIES?Registered Userregular
edited November 2009
The best thing is using the riot shield and walking straight towards a dude to knock him out an suddenly you die and in the killcam it shows him calmly stepping around you and knifing you in the back.
Or someone is shooting you and you keep locking the cam on him but you die and the killcam shows you actually turning your side towards him.
It's just horrible.
Lag is the greatest blight on video gaming. If anyone managed to make a perfect,lag free environment, that man deserves the Nobel prize.
They are talking about making a new game in the modern warfare franchise, not monitising a pre-existing game to charge for shit they are already giving away. That would be a clusterfucknightmare.
And that makes it ok because....?
Because you don't have to play it?
Here's how it works.
Game X by Company Y tests the waters for monentized (see: death by nickle + dime) gaming. Game X is a massive success. Critics are relegated to a fringe group, and we get a Steam Boycott group full of people playing MW2 (oops, I mean Game X).
Now all games being developed are going to follow Game X's model, because you'd be functionally retarded as a developer not to. Your duty as a corporation is to maximize your revenue stream and to minimize cost, and subscription-based gaming is $Texas for minimal work, especially for something like MW2. You don't even have the servers and tech support you need for something like WoW here.
If MW2 doesn't crash and burn, then P2P servers are going to be the norm, with subscription-based tiered access to content and premium one-time buy-ins for really special stuff.
It happens to the extent that the consumer will tolerate it. For example, the people that don't care about P2P vs dedicated servers will buy the game, those that don't wont. Obviously this is a non issue for most people, and you will see it much more in the future. Money is never a non-issue for anyone. The idea that if one shooting game (the most successful one) can make the most profit on a subscription model, then from that point forward, all games will have the best chance of making money that way is fallacious. There will only ever be a certain market for a paid subscription online shooter, and all games that fall under that category will have to directly compete with Game X. The amount of variety in the gaming market is fucking rediculous. The amount of shooters that are just fucking like MW2 is huge. Not everybody who plays shooters is the audeince for MW online.
Dude. 310 million dollar opening day. That's pre-holiday season.
The best thing is using the riot shield and walking straight towards a dude to knock him out an suddenly you die and in the killcam it shows him calmly stepping around you and knifing you in the back.
Or someone is shooting you and you keep locking the cam on him but you die and the killcam shows you actually turning your side towards him.
It's just horrible.
Lag is the greatest blight on video gaming. If anyone managed to make a perfect,lag free environment, that man deserves the Nobel prize.
I just like when I'm getting shot at, I go behind cover. From my perspective, I know I've made it safely to cover and am no longer exposed, but I still die. In the kill cam, it shows me fully exposed. Grrrr.
Dashui on
Xbox Live, PSN & Origin: Vacorsis 3DS: 2638-0037-166
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
They are talking about making a new game in the modern warfare franchise, not monitising a pre-existing game to charge for shit they are already giving away. That would be a clusterfucknightmare.
And that makes it ok because....?
Because you don't have to play it?
Here's how it works.
Game X by Company Y tests the waters for monentized (see: death by nickle + dime) gaming. Game X is a massive success. Critics are relegated to a fringe group, and we get a Steam Boycott group full of people playing MW2 (oops, I mean Game X).
Now all games being developed are going to follow Game X's model, because you'd be functionally retarded as a developer not to. Your duty as a corporation is to maximize your revenue stream and to minimize cost, and subscription-based gaming is $Texas for minimal work, especially for something like MW2. You don't even have the servers and tech support you need for something like WoW here.
If MW2 doesn't crash and burn, then P2P servers are going to be the norm, with subscription-based tiered access to content and premium one-time buy-ins for really special stuff.
It happens to the extent that the consumer will tolerate it. For example, the people that don't care about P2P vs dedicated servers will buy the game, those that don't wont. Obviously this is a non issue for most people, and you will see it much more in the future. Money is never a non-issue for anyone. The idea that if one shooting game (the most successful one) can make the most profit on a subscription model, then from that point forward, all games will have the best chance of making money that way is fallacious. There will only ever be a certain market for a paid subscription online shooter, and all games that fall under that category will have to directly compete with Game X. The amount of variety in the gaming market is fucking rediculous. The amount of shooters that are just fucking like MW2 is huge. Not everybody who plays shooters is the audeince for MW online.
Except the average PC consumer isn't going about other obscure shooters. The only other major shooter that's 'just fucking like' MW2 is BC2 and that doesn't even have half the marketing that MW2 does. They'll know about X triple-AAA shooter that everyone is playing and paying monthly for, and then with that Company Y comes out with their awesome flashy monthly sub shooter, they'll either stick with X or jump to Y's product. Once this ball starts rolling, it eventually envelopes everyone because why not? Saying money is a non-issue is a strange thing to say when we have everyone on the PC MW2 paying 10 dollars more for less. The only people that will be phased out are young people who can't get a hold of their credits cards, and just as we've seen with the feature cutting for MW2, there will be plenty of people that will jump up to justify a monthly sub on a shooter for basic features that every shooter has had up to this point.
Open NAT my fucking ass. Piece of shit.
The retarding matchmatching won't accept anything short of enabling DMZ which I'd be a fucktard to do.
Late bump/question... but does anyone know why my NAT randomly changes on my 360? I'll reset my router and it'll be OPEN for about a day or two. And then for no reason, it'll change to Moderate (and last night, it was Strict for a while...).
What I like is when you get boycott groups such as for MW2 and L4D2 and half the people on them buy the game.
You can only control the integrity of yourself.
This isn't some bandwagon BS. They've made a terrible series of choices that would decrease my enjoyment. Regardless of the impact of my actions, I simply have better things to spend money on.
Open NAT my fucking ass. Piece of shit.
The retarding matchmatching won't accept anything short of enabling DMZ which I'd be a fucktard to do.
Late bump/question... but does anyone know why my NAT randomly changes on my 360? I'll reset my router and it'll be OPEN for about a day or two. And then for no reason, it'll change to Moderate (and last night, it was Strict for a while...).
Is your xbox on a static ip? If it's not your port fowarding might not be working all the time.
edit: Anyone have a way of adding people from the PA CoD Clan? Seems like with the XBL preference change to avoid talking to the unwashed masses, you can't send a msg to a PA guy letting him know you're also a PA guy.
Open NAT my fucking ass. Piece of shit.
The retarding matchmatching won't accept anything short of enabling DMZ which I'd be a fucktard to do.
Late bump/question... but does anyone know why my NAT randomly changes on my 360? I'll reset my router and it'll be OPEN for about a day or two. And then for no reason, it'll change to Moderate (and last night, it was Strict for a while...).
Is your xbox on a static ip? If it's not your port fowarding might not be working all the time.
Not on static IP. If my port forwarding isn't working all the time, how would I get it to do that? I've got the right ports open (AFAIK) and it's not like I fuck around with my settings every few days.
I'm getting well and truly bloody annoyed at this "new direction for online play" I've yet to have a connection under 150ms, despite living in the UK every single time I hook up I'm dumped into a group of Yanks
Localisation for the love of god.
It's practically imposable to get a northern European connection.
HuggyBear on
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
edited November 2009
You need to put your 360 on a fixed IP in your router, usually by reserving whatever IP it is on now. Then you forward the required ports for that IP.
I just played a match today that was 4 v 4... 4V4!!! Are you serious? It was on a huge map I don't know the names of yet.
Hell I'm pretty sure I never played with that small of teams even on the console version of mW1. That's way too small.
It's weird we crammed 50 people on maps that where built for about 25 on the last game and now that we have the maps to support large groups we're stuck with 8-12.
Then there's ground war. They made only one option for 9v9 gametypes that's random between TDM and Domination. Which I guess is alright if it was on a rotation every other map or something but when you play 4 domination maps in a row it becomes not as fun making you either go out to lobby and jump in and out of ground wars till you find one you want or go back to the playlists where you can pick the gametype and be stuck with the option of epic 4v4 wasteland hunts.
I'm having fun with the game but their playlists need some work and I feel really led on by IW when they claimed 9v9 was the cap... it's not even that high. mostly 6v6 except for one gametype
I'm getting well and truly bloody annoyed at this "new direction for online play" I've yet to have a connection under 150ms, despite living in the UK every single time I hook up I'm dumped into a group of Yanks
Localisation for the love of god.
It's practically imposable to get a northern European connection.
Man, I've been bitching about this for the past few days in here as well. I assure you, it's not just you and it's everyone outside of the US suffering this problem.
I think I need to take a break. It seems like the more I play this game the worse I get. Or maybe it's just everyone else getting better.
Having not played CoD for a while, I forgot how completely at the mercy of the spawn system you are in most modes. Combined with the fact that most maps are cluttered and confusing as hell, I constantly get killed by guys that seem to appear out of thin air. Maybe hardcore SnD will help me get my groove back a bit.
Dangerous on
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
edited November 2009
This is why I love tactical insertion. Having a predictable spawn point helps soooo much.
People shouldn't get me wrong in this thread, I only bitch about the local search because I like the game and it's the most fun online FPS I've played in a while when you have green ping. But as it is 4/5 of my classes are useless when playing with yellow ping and that is rather depressing.
You're right to bitch though. Why isn't there a search local option? The matchmaking system for anyone outside the US is clearly not optimal. I live in Canada and play with friends who live within 30 minutes of me. If I get a 6 person party going for TDM, we regulary get disconnected from each other during the matchmaking process. This should not happen.
I can't speak for my friends, but I have a 10mbps connection. If we can all get into a match without being booted, typically the host will migrate over to me because we make up the majority of the match and I have the best connection. When this happens, we have amazing games. Why can't I tell the matchmaking system to only connect me to people local to me? What can't I tell the matchmaking system to select the best host from within my party? I realize Treyarch is a different company, but they included Local Search and it worked VERY well for me.
I'm getting well and truly bloody annoyed at this "new direction for online play" I've yet to have a connection under 150ms, despite living in the UK every single time I hook up I'm dumped into a group of Yanks
Localisation for the love of god.
It's practically imposable to get a northern European connection.
Man, I've been bitching about this for the past few days in here as well. I assure you, it's not just you and it's everyone outside of the US suffering this problem.
Let's hug anyway, it will make us feel better.
It sucks when the consumer has no grasp of the technology behind the product theyre purchasing. It was easy to see how terrible p2p would be for a FPS shooter. Man I feel bad for yalls pocketbook and expectations.
FingerSlut on
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
edited November 2009
I don't know about HuggyBear, but I expected Peer to Peer on the 360. The problem with the 360 peer to peer is the matchmaking is retarded and routinely thinks a 300ms+ ping is acceptable for international users. It has a simple fix as well if IW can be bothered implementing it.
Open NAT my fucking ass. Piece of shit.
The retarding matchmatching won't accept anything short of enabling DMZ which I'd be a fucktard to do.
Late bump/question... but does anyone know why my NAT randomly changes on my 360? I'll reset my router and it'll be OPEN for about a day or two. And then for no reason, it'll change to Moderate (and last night, it was Strict for a while...).
Is your xbox on a static ip? If it's not your port fowarding might not be working all the time.
Not on static IP. If my port forwarding isn't working all the time, how would I get it to do that? I've got the right ports open (AFAIK) and it's not like I fuck around with my settings every few days.
You need to put your 360 on a fixed IP in your router, usually by reserving whatever IP it is on now. Then you forward the required ports for that IP.
Google will probably give you step by step instructions if you put in your router model and 'how do i create a static ip?' And all it takes for your settings to get messed up is for any device to take your xbox's usual ip, it's got nothing to do with you changing your settings.
Except the average PC consumer isn't going about other obscure shooters. The only other major shooter that's 'just fucking like' MW2 is BC2 and that doesn't even have half the marketing that MW2 does.
I'm talking about Rainbow six, Ghost recon, counter strike. Ect. The same market: online realistic military shooters. You think if MW:Cash Cow is successfull, that these will all become monitized? give me a fucking break. The market can't take that much.
They'll know about X triple-AAA shooter that everyone is playing and paying monthly for, and then with that Company Y comes out with their awesome flashy monthly sub shooter, they'll either stick with X or jump to Y's product. Once this ball starts rolling, it eventually envelopes everyone because why not?
Because why not? Really? Because that's not the way the market works. I tried to spell that out real slow like.
Saying money is a non-issue is a strange thing to say when we have everyone on the PC MW2 paying 10 dollars more for less. The only people that will be phased out are young people who can't get a hold of their credits cards, and just as we've seen with the feature cutting for MW2, there will be plenty of people that will jump up to justify a monthly sub on a shooter for basic features that every shooter has had up to this point.
I said that money is not a non issue. That is why most people will not pay money for something they can get for free.
Indica1 on
If the president had any real power, he'd be able to live wherever the fuck he wanted.
I'm talking about Rainbow six, Ghost recon, counter strike. Ect. The same market: online realistic military shooters. You think if MW:Cash Cow is successfull, that these will all become monitized? give me a fucking break. The market can't take that much.
The developers of such games will definitely be interested in whether a monetized MW works. Don't think for a second that those developers wouldn't jump on the chance to throw micro-transactions or subs onto their games if it worked with MW, especially Rainbow Six which has had similar success to COD on the consoles and PCs up until now. The MMO market works just fine like this, and there's as much if not more consumers for shooters than there are for those.
This isn't a pay to play model though. If they can sell one like they sold this then you would be right, but that would mean that not a single person I know would have bought the game. Do you know anyone willing to pay for that? Again, not saying it wouldn't sell, just that it would not have anywhere near this much success.
Indica1 on
If the president had any real power, he'd be able to live wherever the fuck he wanted.
I'm talking about Rainbow six, Ghost recon, counter strike. Ect. The same market: online realistic military shooters. You think if MW:Cash Cow is successfull, that these will all become monitized? give me a fucking break. The market can't take that much.
The developers of such games will definitely be interested in whether a monetized MW works. Don't think for a second that those developers wouldn't jump on the chance to throw micro-transactions or subs onto their games if it worked with MW, especially Rainbow Six which has had similar success to COD on the consoles and PCs up until now. The MMO market works just fine like this, and there's as much if not more consumers for shooters than there are for those.
damn, you are seriously missing the fucking point.
Indica1 on
If the president had any real power, he'd be able to live wherever the fuck he wanted.
I'm talking about Rainbow six, Ghost recon, counter strike. Ect. The same market: online realistic military shooters. You think if MW:Cash Cow is successfull, that these will all become monitized? give me a fucking break. The market can't take that much.
The developers of such games will definitely be interested in whether a monetized MW works. Don't think for a second that those developers wouldn't jump on the chance to throw micro-transactions or subs onto their games if it worked with MW, especially Rainbow Six which has had similar success to COD on the consoles and PCs up until now. The MMO market works just fine like this, and there's as much if not more consumers for shooters than there are for those.
damn, you are seriously missing the fucking point.
Well then you're obviously not explaining it well enough or are dodging the point. You're saying that developers of future iterations of these franchises wouldn't think about monetizing their games even if it worked well enough with whatever MW they come out with next?
This isn't a pay to play model though. If they can sell one like they sold this then you would be right, but that would mean that not a single person I know would have bought the game. Do you know anyone willing to pay for that? Again, not saying it wouldn't sell, just that it would not have anywhere near this much success.
They released this game lacking some basic functions. If people jump on board to pay for those features as premium, paid-content, then the proof of concept has been demonstrated. It's game over for the expectation for a complete game to be shipped in the box.
This isn't a pay to play model though. If they can sell one like they sold this then you would be right, but that would mean that not a single person I know would have bought the game. Do you know anyone willing to pay for that? Again, not saying it wouldn't sell, just that it would not have anywhere near this much success.
They released this game lacking some basic functions. If people jump on board to pay for those features as premium, paid-content, then the proof of concept has been demonstrated. It's game over for the expectation for a complete game to be shipped in the box.
We've already seen this occur in fits and starts with DLC, I'm not sure why this is such a big leap in logic?
This isn't a pay to play model though. If they can sell one like they sold this then you would be right, but that would mean that not a single person I know would have bought the game. Do you know anyone willing to pay for that? Again, not saying it wouldn't sell, just that it would not have anywhere near this much success.
They released this game lacking some basic functions. If people jump on board to pay for those features as premium, paid-content, then the proof of concept has been demonstrated. It's game over for the expectation for a complete game to be shipped in the box.
We've already seen this occur in fits and starts with DLC, I'm not sure why this is such a big leap in logic?
Well there's a bit of a gap between day-one on-disc paid-for DLC for extra missions as part of an otherwise complete game vs. what is the next step, entire aspects of the game previously assumed to be part of a competent effort being held back as premium content.
As an analogy for people not quite getting the outrage, this is like shopping for a car. Right now, which is where we are with DLC, you have the option to pay extra for the upgraded speaker systems, etc.
Where we seem to be headed is that you're going to have to pay $Texas for basic things like tires and a steering wheel.
Open NAT my fucking ass. Piece of shit.
The retarding matchmatching won't accept anything short of enabling DMZ which I'd be a fucktard to do.
Late bump/question... but does anyone know why my NAT randomly changes on my 360? I'll reset my router and it'll be OPEN for about a day or two. And then for no reason, it'll change to Moderate (and last night, it was Strict for a while...).
Is your xbox on a static ip? If it's not your port fowarding might not be working all the time.
Not on static IP. If my port forwarding isn't working all the time, how would I get it to do that? I've got the right ports open (AFAIK) and it's not like I fuck around with my settings every few days.
You need to put your 360 on a fixed IP in your router, usually by reserving whatever IP it is on now. Then you forward the required ports for that IP.
Google will probably give you step by step instructions if you put in your router model and 'how do i create a static ip?' And all it takes for your settings to get messed up is for any device to take your xbox's usual ip, it's got nothing to do with you changing your settings.
I'm getting well and truly bloody annoyed at this "new direction for online play" I've yet to have a connection under 150ms, despite living in the UK every single time I hook up I'm dumped into a group of Yanks
Localisation for the love of god.
It's practically imposable to get a northern European connection.
Man, I've been bitching about this for the past few days in here as well. I assure you, it's not just you and it's everyone outside of the US suffering this problem.
Let's hug anyway, it will make us feel better.
Problem solved: for the PC at least.
I went into the MP config files and change the Max allowed match up ping from 800ms to 135 , while I was at it a upped the max packet allowance up to 100.
Suddenly I'm in smooth relativle low ping matches.
I'm getting well and truly bloody annoyed at this "new direction for online play" I've yet to have a connection under 150ms, despite living in the UK every single time I hook up I'm dumped into a group of Yanks
Localisation for the love of god.
It's practically imposable to get a northern European connection.
Man, I've been bitching about this for the past few days in here as well. I assure you, it's not just you and it's everyone outside of the US suffering this problem.
Let's hug anyway, it will make us feel better.
Problem solved: for the PC at least.
I went into the MP config files and change the Max ping from 800ms to 135 , while I was at it a upped the max packet allowance up to 100.
Suddenly I'm un smooth relativle low ping matches.
Be careful with that shit, it wouldn't surprise me if IW set the VAC checks to include config and .ini files
I'm getting well and truly bloody annoyed at this "new direction for online play" I've yet to have a connection under 150ms, despite living in the UK every single time I hook up I'm dumped into a group of Yanks
Localisation for the love of god.
It's practically imposable to get a northern European connection.
Man, I've been bitching about this for the past few days in here as well. I assure you, it's not just you and it's everyone outside of the US suffering this problem.
Let's hug anyway, it will make us feel better.
Problem solved: for the PC at least.
I went into the MP config files and change the Max allowed match up ping from 800ms to 135 , while I was at it a upped the max packet allowance up to 100.
Suddenly I'm in smooth relativle low ping matches.
Whoa WHOA! Be careful with that crap!
That sounds like a really awesome find (seriously, why on EARTH is the Max acceptable ping set at 800? Are they nuts?), but first you need to make sure that VAC won't flag modified config files and put you down as cheating.
Can anyone else verify that this shouldn't (hopefully) trigger anything on the VAC / IWnet side?
EDIT: Aaaand it looks like me and Robman were thinking the same thing.
I'm getting well and truly bloody annoyed at this "new direction for online play" I've yet to have a connection under 150ms, despite living in the UK every single time I hook up I'm dumped into a group of Yanks
Localisation for the love of god.
It's practically imposable to get a northern European connection.
Man, I've been bitching about this for the past few days in here as well. I assure you, it's not just you and it's everyone outside of the US suffering this problem.
Let's hug anyway, it will make us feel better.
Problem solved: for the PC at least.
I went into the MP config files and change the Max allowed match up ping from 800ms to 135 , while I was at it a upped the max packet allowance up to 100.
Suddenly I'm in smooth relativle low ping matches.
800ms? Who in Zeus' butthole would think that 200-799ms ping would be enjoyable?
I'm getting well and truly bloody annoyed at this "new direction for online play" I've yet to have a connection under 150ms, despite living in the UK every single time I hook up I'm dumped into a group of Yanks
Localisation for the love of god.
It's practically imposable to get a northern European connection.
Man, I've been bitching about this for the past few days in here as well. I assure you, it's not just you and it's everyone outside of the US suffering this problem.
Let's hug anyway, it will make us feel better.
Problem solved: for the PC at least.
I went into the MP config files and change the Max allowed match up ping from 800ms to 135 , while I was at it a upped the max packet allowance up to 100.
Suddenly I'm in smooth relativle low ping matches.
800ms? Who in Zeus' butthole would think that 200-799ms ping would be enjoyable?
Posts
Or someone is shooting you and you keep locking the cam on him but you die and the killcam shows you actually turning your side towards him.
It's just horrible.
Lag is the greatest blight on video gaming. If anyone managed to make a perfect,lag free environment, that man deserves the Nobel prize.
We'll give it to him as soon as the guy who invented the "singleplayer game" is identified.
Awww, look at you, you are so sly. SO sly.
I wish I could STRANGLE YOU.
Dude. 310 million dollar opening day. That's pre-holiday season.
The Overton Window isn't just restricted to politics.
I just like when I'm getting shot at, I go behind cover. From my perspective, I know I've made it safely to cover and am no longer exposed, but I still die. In the kill cam, it shows me fully exposed. Grrrr.
You can when someone makes that device that can strangle people over the internet.
I'm sure that guy will win a Nobel prize too.
Except the average PC consumer isn't going about other obscure shooters. The only other major shooter that's 'just fucking like' MW2 is BC2 and that doesn't even have half the marketing that MW2 does. They'll know about X triple-AAA shooter that everyone is playing and paying monthly for, and then with that Company Y comes out with their awesome flashy monthly sub shooter, they'll either stick with X or jump to Y's product. Once this ball starts rolling, it eventually envelopes everyone because why not? Saying money is a non-issue is a strange thing to say when we have everyone on the PC MW2 paying 10 dollars more for less. The only people that will be phased out are young people who can't get a hold of their credits cards, and just as we've seen with the feature cutting for MW2, there will be plenty of people that will jump up to justify a monthly sub on a shooter for basic features that every shooter has had up to this point.
When we are arguing how retarded consumers are and how self-destructive gamers are I don't see how this is an argument against our position
It certainly isn't trying to be I assure you.
Late bump/question... but does anyone know why my NAT randomly changes on my 360? I'll reset my router and it'll be OPEN for about a day or two. And then for no reason, it'll change to Moderate (and last night, it was Strict for a while...).
You can only control the integrity of yourself.
This isn't some bandwagon BS. They've made a terrible series of choices that would decrease my enjoyment. Regardless of the impact of my actions, I simply have better things to spend money on.
edit: Anyone have a way of adding people from the PA CoD Clan? Seems like with the XBL preference change to avoid talking to the unwashed masses, you can't send a msg to a PA guy letting him know you're also a PA guy.
Not on static IP. If my port forwarding isn't working all the time, how would I get it to do that? I've got the right ports open (AFAIK) and it's not like I fuck around with my settings every few days.
Localisation for the love of god.
It's practically imposable to get a northern European connection.
Hell I'm pretty sure I never played with that small of teams even on the console version of mW1. That's way too small.
It's weird we crammed 50 people on maps that where built for about 25 on the last game and now that we have the maps to support large groups we're stuck with 8-12.
Then there's ground war. They made only one option for 9v9 gametypes that's random between TDM and Domination. Which I guess is alright if it was on a rotation every other map or something but when you play 4 domination maps in a row it becomes not as fun making you either go out to lobby and jump in and out of ground wars till you find one you want or go back to the playlists where you can pick the gametype and be stuck with the option of epic 4v4 wasteland hunts.
I'm having fun with the game but their playlists need some work and I feel really led on by IW when they claimed 9v9 was the cap... it's not even that high. mostly 6v6 except for one gametype
Man, I've been bitching about this for the past few days in here as well. I assure you, it's not just you and it's everyone outside of the US suffering this problem.
Let's hug anyway, it will make us feel better.
Having not played CoD for a while, I forgot how completely at the mercy of the spawn system you are in most modes. Combined with the fact that most maps are cluttered and confusing as hell, I constantly get killed by guys that seem to appear out of thin air. Maybe hardcore SnD will help me get my groove back a bit.
You're right to bitch though. Why isn't there a search local option? The matchmaking system for anyone outside the US is clearly not optimal. I live in Canada and play with friends who live within 30 minutes of me. If I get a 6 person party going for TDM, we regulary get disconnected from each other during the matchmaking process. This should not happen.
I can't speak for my friends, but I have a 10mbps connection. If we can all get into a match without being booted, typically the host will migrate over to me because we make up the majority of the match and I have the best connection. When this happens, we have amazing games. Why can't I tell the matchmaking system to only connect me to people local to me? What can't I tell the matchmaking system to select the best host from within my party? I realize Treyarch is a different company, but they included Local Search and it worked VERY well for me.
It sucks when the consumer has no grasp of the technology behind the product theyre purchasing. It was easy to see how terrible p2p would be for a FPS shooter. Man I feel bad for yalls pocketbook and expectations.
Aegeri's got it:
Google will probably give you step by step instructions if you put in your router model and 'how do i create a static ip?' And all it takes for your settings to get messed up is for any device to take your xbox's usual ip, it's got nothing to do with you changing your settings.
I'm talking about Rainbow six, Ghost recon, counter strike. Ect. The same market: online realistic military shooters. You think if MW:Cash Cow is successfull, that these will all become monitized? give me a fucking break. The market can't take that much.
I said that money is not a non issue. That is why most people will not pay money for something they can get for free.
If the president had any real power, he'd be able to live wherever the fuck he wanted.
The developers of such games will definitely be interested in whether a monetized MW works. Don't think for a second that those developers wouldn't jump on the chance to throw micro-transactions or subs onto their games if it worked with MW, especially Rainbow Six which has had similar success to COD on the consoles and PCs up until now. The MMO market works just fine like this, and there's as much if not more consumers for shooters than there are for those.
This isn't a pay to play model though. If they can sell one like they sold this then you would be right, but that would mean that not a single person I know would have bought the game. Do you know anyone willing to pay for that? Again, not saying it wouldn't sell, just that it would not have anywhere near this much success.
If the president had any real power, he'd be able to live wherever the fuck he wanted.
damn, you are seriously missing the fucking point.
If the president had any real power, he'd be able to live wherever the fuck he wanted.
Well then you're obviously not explaining it well enough or are dodging the point. You're saying that developers of future iterations of these franchises wouldn't think about monetizing their games even if it worked well enough with whatever MW they come out with next?
They released this game lacking some basic functions. If people jump on board to pay for those features as premium, paid-content, then the proof of concept has been demonstrated. It's game over for the expectation for a complete game to be shipped in the box.
We've already seen this occur in fits and starts with DLC, I'm not sure why this is such a big leap in logic?
Well there's a bit of a gap between day-one on-disc paid-for DLC for extra missions as part of an otherwise complete game vs. what is the next step, entire aspects of the game previously assumed to be part of a competent effort being held back as premium content.
As an analogy for people not quite getting the outrage, this is like shopping for a car. Right now, which is where we are with DLC, you have the option to pay extra for the upgraded speaker systems, etc.
Where we seem to be headed is that you're going to have to pay $Texas for basic things like tires and a steering wheel.
Thanks guys, I'll look into this.
Problem solved: for the PC at least.
I went into the MP config files and change the Max allowed match up ping from 800ms to 135 , while I was at it a upped the max packet allowance up to 100.
Suddenly I'm in smooth relativle low ping matches.
Be careful with that shit, it wouldn't surprise me if IW set the VAC checks to include config and .ini files
Whoa WHOA! Be careful with that crap!
That sounds like a really awesome find (seriously, why on EARTH is the Max acceptable ping set at 800? Are they nuts?), but first you need to make sure that VAC won't flag modified config files and put you down as cheating.
Can anyone else verify that this shouldn't (hopefully) trigger anything on the VAC / IWnet side?
EDIT: Aaaand it looks like me and Robman were thinking the same thing.
800ms? Who in Zeus' butthole would think that 200-799ms ping would be enjoyable?
Aussies :rotate: