Call of Duty 2 Causing Server Unrest 61
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."
Er... "Deember"? (Score:4, Funny)
It's just before Smarch. (Score:1)
Re:Er... "Deember"? (Score:1)
Re:Er... "Deember"? (Score:2)
Re:Er... "Deember"? (Score:2)
http://www.snpp.com/episodes/3F04.html [snpp.com]
Affects only servers run by gamers (Score:5, Insightful)
For a while there, I thought this was a strike being organized by some company that ran CoD2 servers, ala XBox Live. If that was the case, this would be Bad News(tm) for Call of Duty. Then I read TFA, and realized that wasn't the case.
Here, the "strike" is being organized (if you can call it that) by an upset gamer who runs a server, calling on others who run similar servers to take down their servers for a day. Still pretty bad PR for CoD2, but only if 99% of the game servers out there take part. Unfortunately, I suspect this will have about as much impact as those "Don't-Buy-Gas Day" boycotts I see via email from time to time (trying to force Big Oil to drop the price of gas at the pump.) That is, it will generate some press buzz, but in the end I doubt the company whose attention they are trying to attract will pay them much attention.
That said, cheaters really suck, and it kills the online gaming experience. I stopped playing online FPSs entirely because of cheaters.
Re:Affects only servers run by gamers (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Affects only servers run by gamers (Score:1)
I play TFC (an old HL mod) and because it's an older game with a small yet strong player pool, there tends to be a larger comunity feel. While I only play in about 2 servers, I know many top players via online comunities like http://www.fortress-forever.com/ [fortress-forever.com]
Re:Affects only servers run by gamers (Score:1)
Re:Affects only servers run by gamers (Score:1)
But let me tell you that playing w
Re:Affects only servers run by gamers (Score:2)
I can't say for sure in this case, but I do know that word really gets around in some of the other game communities I'm involved in. I know if something like this happened in Enemy Territory, that about 50% players would probably hear about it within a day or two. Once word gets out into a few big game forums, people will start passing the word on.
The other big issue, which is also one of the biggest problems I see with fps players, is that they take everything ultra seriously. As soon as players get a whi
Coolio (Score:1)
Re:Coolio (Score:2)
No problems with the Xbox 360 version of Call of Duty. Everything works fine.
Cheaters get booted.
Live is good.
Re:Coolio (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Coolio (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Coolio (Score:3, Informative)
Oh, and the fact that they want to use ranked games, using some dipwad's home internet connection.
Re:Coolio (Score:2)
It's Kind of Obvious (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Gamers are dicks. (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd say these days it more of a requirement than something nice. Unless you are tacking on multiplayer as an afterthought you really can't expect people to just play nice...because your original topic is pretty much on target.
Re:Gamers are dicks. (Score:5, Interesting)
More like "necessity". This isn't just to make gamers happy, it's in the publishers best interests as well. If it gets around that online cheating is rampant, people will be much, much less likely to buy the game.
Re:Gamers are %&#$s. (Score:1)
This is true if the game is marketed as a massive multiplayer game like World of Warcraft or Battlefield 1942. However COD2 is a heavily scripted single-player game with a the multiplayer component tacked on. I don't think it's worth that much money to invest in the neverending war against
Re:Gamers are %&#$s. (Score:1)
Re:Gamers are %&#$s. (Score:1)
What most people don't realize is that cheaters don't ruin y
Re:Gamers are dicks. (Score:1)
Re:Gamers are dicks. (Score:1)
Having played COD2, I really dont see what all the fuss is about, though. It looks good, but its pretty much COD with better graphics, and it really adds nothing to the gameplay side of th
Re:Gamers are dicks. (Score:2)
I don't know what you're getting on about saying the controls and gameplay are just screaming console. I wasn't really aware that there was going to be an Xbox360 port, and only now have I realized afte
Re:Gamers are dicks. (Score:1)
Re:Gamers are dicks. (Score:2)
Re:Gamers are dicks. (Score:1)
Re:Gamers are dicks. (Score:2)
Re:Gamers are dicks. (Score:2, Interesting)
1. Punkbuster
2. Vehicles
3. New weapons, including light machine guns
4. The ability to run for short distances. Previously, you could only walk, crouch/walk, and crawl.
5. Battle rank. As you reached point thresholds, your rank increased.
6. New games types including Capture The Flag, Headquarters
With the exception of Punkbuster, COD2 included none of the additions from COD:UO. They added a lot of "eye candy" and reduce
Re:Gamers are dicks. (Score:1)
Going to CoD2 from CoD:UO, I was disappointed to see that the gains of UO were reversed. One theory some friends and I kicked around is that the extra goodies added in UO are Grey Matter's turf, and Infinity Ward wasn't allowed to put them in. Whether there's some sort of intellectual property dispute or licensing fees or whatever, we didn't decide on.
Another theory we discussed is that there was a planned expansion pack to add the extra stuff and charge more money. CoD2:U
Draconian measure? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Draconian measure? (Score:2)
Game time, or real time?
Re: (Score:1)
Again? (Score:2, Informative)
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 g
Re:Again? (Score:2)
How is this new? Complex PC games have always required patches to work properly (with exceptions, of course). This is not "slowly making its way," it's "rearing its head yet again." The difference is that a major aspect of gameplay is controlled by people outside the publisher, who are being lobbied t
New cheat idea (Score:2)
Disclaimer: I generally don't play games.
Re:New cheat idea (Score:1)
Already cashed in (Score:2)
Re:Already cashed in (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Already cashed in (Score:1)
Re:Why does it need a patch? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Why does it need a patch? (Score:1)
Single Player is Great (Score:1, Offtopic)
I don't know what the issues are. The only things I've seen are it isn't as good as the expansion and there is no punkbuster.
I found the single player experience to be pretty exciting. The game is a visual treat as you fight through a bunch of great looking maps with your squad. They call out gun emplacments and germans alike as yo
Re:Single Player is Great (Score:1)
COD 2 Compared to Battlefield 2? (Score:1)
But then I started actually reading people's opinions of COD2, and I am probably not going to get it now. I play games almost exclusively online, so single player campaigns mean nothing to me.
How is the online play of COD2 compared to Battlefiel
Re:COD 2 Compared to Battlefield 2? (Score:3, Informative)
My personal recommendation is to pass on this one.
Why don't they give them a break? (Score:1)
No Anti-Cheat System? (Score:2)