Slashdot Mirror
Call of Duty 2 Causing Server Unrest
Despite the excellent gameplay, Call of Duty 2 is causing a lot of internet unrest among the players who want to participate in the online multiplayer component. GamePolitics reports on a thread from the official site. From the site: "Server admins - those mysterious men (and women) behind the curtain who keep online gaming venues humming - are fed up with the PC version of Call of Duty 2. So fed up that they are planning a 24-hour shutdown of COD2 servers on Deember 16th if publisher Activision and developer Infinity Ward fail to address their complaints, which include the lack of an anti-cheat system."
You have a point there, but the power to boycott rests in a fairly small number of hands. CoD probably has less than 2000 servers and it wouldn't take that much to take a pretty large chunk out of those. Also, I'd say that the majority of game servers are directly run by clans and user communities and as a whole they are a pretty close-knit bunch. That being the case, I can easily see this catching on and gathering momentum.
Everything works fine, apart from the silly 8 player maximum for Xbox 360 on live...
Join the Digital TV discussion @ http://forums.dvbowners.com
and the fact you can't invite people to a game after it has started.
This seems to be happening in a lot these days.
A similar situation is happening with valve software, players of the online valve-developed games are becoming fed up with the constant stream of updates that don't actually seem to fix bugs.
Now another developer is releasing more software that's bad enough to generate word of a 24-hour boycott.
Laziness is slowly making it's way into software companies. Eventually, I use this term loosely as it may take 5 years for anything to happen, people will stop buying games until the developers fix them.
Of course, with a huge advertising budget the companies can always discredit complaints. Unfortunately, I only foresee the lying in advertising getting worse in the near future.
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
And the complete lack of dedicated servers, which make multiplayer games above 4 users next to worthless with the amount of lag.
Oh, and the fact that they want to use ranked games, using some dipwad's home internet connection.
[DISCLAIMER: This post is a work of satire and should not be misconstrued as a holy text upon which to base a religion.]
Because a large multiplayer user base acts as a continuous advert for the game, attracting new players and keeping sales up throughout the shelf life of the game. Popular multiplayer games spawn fansites, mods, clans and competitions which all act to introduce new players to the game.
The single player is really nice, however have you ever played COD:UO? If you have you will then know why everyone is so upset with COD2. COD:UO had everything in it and then they came out with COD2 and left everything out. Read the forums below for the non-biased version of what is going on with this game. http://forums.raidersmerciless.com/
Depends, it's extremely quaketastic. If you liked COD:UO gameplay, you will be disappointed. If you liked COD, you might be ok with it. Things that have changed since COD:UO and COD2. No tanks, No portable emplacements, crappy sounds, SMALL maps, recoil reduced, nade indicator. If you ever wondered what it would be like to play Q3 with WWII weapons, here is your chance. (I know it's not exactly like Q3 gameplay)
My personal recommendation is to pass on this one.