Want To Play The Multiplayer FPS Games You Bought?

Thanks to GamerDad for its editorial discussing why it's sometimes impossible to play multiplayer FPS titles as the developers intended it. The author argues: "I certainly don't think that every mod I've ever run across is better than the core game that ships in the box but yet there's often no one running the boxed game", before noting that most game publishers "...do not run their own servers for these games so you can't count on them supporting the boxed game either. There are exceptions to this rule but for the most part when it comes to PC games, you're at the whims of the many fan owned and operated servers... [which may] limit the maps to a select few in a deathmatch game or change the settings of the game to make it play very differently from what you expect."

Comments

Savage

[MegaT]

Savage is a team FPS where one player commands the team RTS style. There's a linux version available which I've found tends to run faster than its windows counterpart. As far as this game goes, the balance is so subtle that any changes made by server admins can completely ruin the dynamics of the game... fortunately this rarely happens and I think s2games run quite a number of servers themselves (though I don't use them because I'm in europe).

BF1942- No mods for me

[Mostly Monkey]

I've been playing BF1942 for over a year now. Most of the big problems I've seen with people (Team killing or blowing up a vehicle because you got to it first) have been with the mod versions of the game like Desert Combat and the like. I'm not sure why this is but ever since I started playing on Co-op servers I've rarely had any problems. People just seem to be more mature on the classic version.

Mods aren't that difficult to avoid

[Anonymous Coward]

My experience with online FPS is limited to less than half a decade (RtCW, ET and CoD). I haven't had quite the problem that GamerDad has. I locate a server that runs map rotations that are to my liking and I keep going back. Most of these are run by clans or communities that host forums. Go to their forums and interact. Let them know what you like and don't like. Find out why they have the rotation the way it is. Frankly, I think the mods are far less irritating the the foul-mouthed-mental-midget-12-year-olds that whine/cry/flame about other players/gameplay/aps/rotation during the games.

I've found that the best servers are the ones that routinely have admins playing and enforcing rules. Most of the mods I have experience with only tweak the gameplay to add a few things or allow better admin abilities. There are far more intrusive mods, but I avoid those servers. Some mods add subtle dynamics that the game developers left out (cookable grenades are a popular item in CoD, but the developers didn't implement this), others aim to change the entire nature of the game. The server I help admin (VSFGamers Northeast for CoD -- shameless plug) uses an admin bot that facilitates admining the server. We rotate in a mod that allows for a variant game type. But most of the game is pretty stock. The players do not need to download anything to play, all the extra stuff is server-side. Except for maps... but we keep links in our forums for where to find the maps.

If you are playing a game that has aged significantly you cannot expect the servers to remain there forever. Just because every six months or so you get an urge to play [insert old game name here] doesn't mean that someone else has to maintain a server 365day/year. Its easier to locate unmodded servers for newer games.

All that being said, I think it behooves the game companies to host servers of their own. The main purpose is not to provide an unmodded environment, but to demonstrate how servers can be run using only the basic install (patched, of course). That is, have the server admins enforce the rules and keep the gameplay focused on the game and not teamkilling, sapping, and general knuckle-head behavior.

jroop