After I played CoD:MW2 some hopes I have...

[Senyin]

We need a mission where the resistance needs to wipe out all the civilians in the airport, then let the medics revive them and kill them again! Double shock!

No, no, make that a hospital instead of an airport… triple shock!

I’m really nice irl, honest

[tokamak]

Oh like in ‘The Frighteners’ that hospital scene scarred me for life as a kid. Thanks Peter Jackson.

[Brandmon]

And make the civilians black! Quad Shockage!

[SockDog]

Anti-Cheat is important but if we’re stuck with sucky PC ports I doubt any company is going to invest in the like of PB or a competitor. I guess at least if the game runs through Steam and VAC picks it up your account is tainted forever.

As for MW2. Totally agree with DA. You can point out the deficiencies in the game without a slightest rebuke but the end of every conversation is always “Guurrr-shucks, I’m buying anyway”. MW2 was a sure thing and Activision have thrown every wet dream they’ve had for f*cking with PC gaming to see what would stick.

[tokamak]

And make the civilians black! Quad Shockage!

and president!

[RoryGreen]

[QUOTE=DarkangelUK;201547]You should’ve posted this in the wishes box thread.

Steam stats say there’s currently 93,735 playing MW2 MP, and 40,494 playing SP right now… i’m sure lots of game devs would love to fail like that.[/QUOTE]

Also over 2 million people on xbox live (new record). It may not be perfect but my god it sells. Credit to Activision, they have advertised it really well.

[zXSwordXz]

Just played some COD: MW2 MP on xbox360. I got kill 90% of the time with GL, precision missile and AC130. I just wish for once I can play a freaking fps game and someone kill me with their bullets and not some freaking noob tube. I rather get kill by someone with some skills rather than a freaking noob tube. I really hope SD don’t make the same mistake with BRINK.
@Rahdo - I turn off the aim assist and had no problem picking my target apart one by one. Hope you guys can allow host to disable aim assist on a server level.

[tokamak]

Aww I hope Brink will do better.

[zXSwordXz]

lol…yes…agreed that MW2 suck! Yes, I’m really really hoping SD does better with Brink. So far on paper, Brink look like it will be the game for me.

[Feelgood]

I have a few comments…

About noob tubes. Love this! I am a toober, and I love watching guys get pissed off and calling me names for tubing. I think it is hilarious. They usually get so mad, and it ends up throwing them off their game. I do not have MW2, and will not buy it, however I have played the hell out of MW. My thing is this, you get on a map, say Broadcast, and you got the other team just spraying the walls, moving you down. Guess what? I’m going to lob a few tubes in there and clear it out. For the most part though, I tube more just for the entertainment of pissing off those that hate tubes. I use overkill, and carry two weapons with tubes. So after my first two tubes, I switch over and launch a couple more. Friggin hysterical IMO. I dont do it all the time, but I would say probably 70% of the time, I tube now.

About MW2, personally IMO if you bought this game, and youre a PC player, youre a complete sellout, and all the bad things that you get, you deserve. To support a company like IW that thinks so little of the PC players, and the platform, the very people that made them what they are, their sheer arrogance, makes me sick. Not sure of how real it is, but I have seen floating around rumors of some virus being spread by the P2P setup that MW2 uses. If this is the case, I say GOOD! You wanna sleep around? Youre bound to pick up a disease. Personally I think it is bunk about the virus, but from what I hear, the game does seem to open up your router to a possible attack. Why would anyone in their right mind play this game?

About Brink, I have to say, so far what I am seeing, I am quite disappointed by. I just dont understand why developers seem to want to go backwards, instead of forwards? What is with you guys? Servers should be getting larger as technology gets better, NOT smaller! Brink is going to be 8v8? Are you kidding me? This screams yet another port from console to PC. Wolfenstein 2009 was a meager 6v6, up to 8v8 if you tweaked the configs. Guess what, not two weeks later the game is completely and utterly DEAD! MW2 is 6v6 up to 9v9 and is a direct port to PC, the XBox360 code is still embedded in the PC code FFS. Battlefield Bad Company 2 is only going to support 24 players, or a max of 12v12, and I think THAT is quite lame. 8v8 is simply too damned small to take you guys seriously. If at the time of release, this has not changed, I simply cannot support this game by buying it. How in the hell does a clan have a server so small? Hell most clans 8v8 would be the entire clan. How on earth would you recruit new members, when all the slots will be filled with members?!? These servers, games and maps should be on the LOW end 64 players. 8v8 is nothing more then a private clan server, not one you would use for pubbing or building a clan on. I mean HELL, you have games for the PS3 of all things, with 256 player games coming out. And youre telling me you are going to release an 8v8 game? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?! That is nothing short of pathetic. You guys really need to get your heads out of your asses, and step up to the plate. If you continue to release and pump out crap like this, then IMO, the PC gaming thing should die off. Youve made the PC nothing more then a console as it is.

This should be a PC game, NOT a PS3 game! 256-player Warfare MMO MAG Coming to PS3

About the MW2 dedicated server thing. Despite what sites are posting there are no dedicated servers. What you are seeing so far, is a tool that was created that unlocks the console for the PC. As a result, they have been able to modify and play around with alot of the server cvars, nothing more. Lean has been re-instated, but so far they are no closer to a real dedicated server then when the game was released.

Ok, thats my rant for now. Off to check other forums.

Frag on!

[Shiv]

serious?.. lol

the ps3 256 player game was thought up hours before they showed it off at its first announcement because they where getting raped by the 360’s online mp… it lags like crap on the test servers they have atm and they split everything up so you only see a few of the enemies at a time most of the time anyway… no thanks.

Console on mw2 is now locked. I dont mean its just hidden, i mean locked… thats what one of the updates recently did.
And yes i bought it… no i am not a sellout. No the virus thing was a rumour, the 360 stuff is almost entirely for the 360 controller which some people choose to use on the pc (dont ask me why so thats that one explained as well. Yes some stuff about it irks me, but i enjoy it mostly… just wish it had dedicated servers.

32 man quakewars was too much, it was a spam fest, fun for a little while but the game was designed for 24 max, 20man was the sweet spot in pubs.

If i wanted to play with tons of people at the same time i would jump on an mmo… as the name suggests… its massive.
“Big” mp fps have largely failed to sell/have been crap and lagged like a drunk trying to run in the olympics.
And thats on the pc… where there it is the most likely that large games will work. They dont.

Newer doesnt mean more, i enjoyed my “small” games on quakewars much more than i enjoyed battlefields bigger 64man games. I saw all of my enemies everytime i ran towards the objective. Which is what brink is going to be like from what i have seen. (yay objective play)

Accusing these guys of just making the pc version a port before anything is shown is silly, they have clearly shown interest on making as many people as possible happy and it shows with their presence here on these forums and their continued presence on the quakewars community (which imo is ANYTHING but a port, the console versions are baaaaddd)
It seems like every game that looks anything like a console version is now accused of being a port, its like gamers accusing eachother of having no life and no gf… needing to go outside more… i can go on… but i wont because its stupid and infantile.
we have features like mouse control… we can change our graphics settings and we get text chat in - game for goodness sake!

I dont know where i am going with this anymore lol… so yeah… smaller is not always better i think is my message :… give me tight adrenaline pumping gameplay over big empty fields any day of the week.

[Nail]

I’ve found 8 - 10 players per side to be ideal in the online games or LAN games I play, in W:ET the big servers were fun for a few minutes but no way to develop strategies or any kind of useful defence

[tokamak]

[QUOTE=Feelgood;201846]I have a few comments…

About noob tubes. Love this! I am a toober, and I love watching guys get pissed off and calling me names for tubing. I think it is hilarious. They usually get so mad, and it ends up throwing them off their game. I do not have MW2, and will not buy it, however I have played the hell out of MW. My thing is this, you get on a map, say Broadcast, and you got the other team just spraying the walls, moving you down. Guess what? I’m going to lob a few tubes in there and clear it out. For the most part though, I tube more just for the entertainment of pissing off those that hate tubes. I use overkill, and carry two weapons with tubes. So after my first two tubes, I switch over and launch a couple more. Friggin hysterical IMO. I dont do it all the time, but I would say probably 70% of the time, I tube now.
[/QUOTE]

I hope you see as well that is a very serious threat to the gameplay of any shooter.

[shirosae]

I’ve found 8 - 10 players per side to be ideal in the online games or LAN games I play, in W:ET the big servers were fun for a few minutes but no way to develop strategies or any kind of useful defence

But but but in a game where I run into a room and kill four people in a row to secure before a transmit, it needs to be four different people each time.

Seriouspost: Even if somehow the networking was there to make 256 player matches not run like an xbox-live p2p server hosted by a 360 in the sub-basement of a whaling ship somewhere in the Rio Negro, 256 player games only work out a few different ways:

Planetside: Half wound a billion people as infantry before following at the tail end of an assault force into a base that the enemy have already bugged out from, or be a Reaver pilot and spend all your time doing strafing runs on a base with all the enemies hiding inside whilst the rest of your army sit inside an empty base for 20 minutes waiting for a capture.

Joint Ops: Spend all your time sitting 500m away from the other players trying to work out where everyone else is, before being killed by a tank.

FPS games suck with that many players. They invariably have the player spending more time running about looking for a fight than actually fighting. With that many players wandering about the best way to kill is generally camping, which leads to the most effective way to play also being the most boring way to play.

If 8v8 is what it takes to focus the game around the combat and not around the find-the-combat minigame (and it doesn’t… ETQW managed it with 16v16, though frankly that was too spammy anyway), then I’m quite happy with 8v8.

Quality over quantity etc.

[tokamak]

It’s really easy, the smaller the game the more meaningful your kills.

The spammy maps in W:ET were fun, but senseless. It’s nice to see a battery of five mortars being constantly supplied by two field ops, etc etc. But it gets tedious after a while.

[Pegazus]

I’ve found 8 - 10 players per side to be ideal in the online games or LAN games I play, in W:ET the big servers were fun for a few minutes but no way to develop strategies or any kind of useful defence

Agreed, it is no fun when there are 32 players (16v16). It is a complete utter mess within players, this also depends from the map size.

But it is always great to have more players, not just too many.

[RoryGreen]

[QUOTE=tokamak;201812]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQpcO8x6NNY

Aww I hope Brink will do better.[/QUOTE]

I laughed so much at this video. What an idiot!!!

[Dormamu]

[QUOTE=tokamak;201812]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQpcO8x6NNY

[/QUOTE]

I’m pretty sure i will see him on the news. Another Tim K.?
This movie will be a great condom commercial!

[engiebenjy]

Activision-Blizzard and IW are just greedy corporates that want money. Sadly a lot of people went and bought the game anyay

I am the problem, the casual gamer who wants to run around and shoot at stuff… I paid the same amount as the ‘hardcore’ gamer so why would IW or Activision care?

I have modern warefare 2 (on pc) and its great, i get into a game quickly by just clicking the gametype i want and rarely get any lag. I am aware of the whole argument for dedicated servers and agree with it - but it wont stop me buying a game :o

[kamikazee]

[QUOTE=tokamak;201854]It’s really easy, the smaller the game the more meaningful your kills.

The spammy maps in W:ET were fun, but senseless. It’s nice to see a battery of five mortars being constantly supplied by two field ops, etc etc. But it gets tedious after a while.[/QUOTE]What, you didn’t try giving them some of their own medicine by shelling them?

My point being: try to counter these boring attempts as complaining will probably make the offender giggle. Noob tubes can probably be countered if you don’t move predictably.

If the map simply calls for it, call the map designer names, but don’t players abusing a tactic that works are still trying to win.

Anyway, food for thought. Don’t have to agree with me here but I guess it’s all been discussed before.