Big ol' Bombshell for PC MW2

Post by **Dr. kitteny berk** » October 18th, 2009, 18:35

FatherJack wrote:22k. Maybe they'll see it maybe they won't. I suspect all they see is $$$ signs and no dedicated servers means no hacked ones where people can cheat or use a non-legit version.

I imagine this is the thing, cracked servers really pissed them off with cod4.

Probably also explains the move to vac, as I expect it's more customisable (blocking modded .exe and .dlls?)

Baliame · Post by **Baliame** » October 18th, 2009, 18:45

VAC is ultimately user friendlier than Punkbuster, I don't think the significance lies in which people use because with enough fiddling both can be turned off. I mean if someone desperately wants to get on a cracked server they still circumvent the whole system with a lot of painful work, and he doesn't need a modded exe or dll for that, and I'm pretty damn sure this would be the hitler extreme of anti-cheat if that's the end-purpose - in the end, any approach I take on this, it just keeps on making no sense at all. Without dedicated servers though, the possibility of finding a good server through matchmaking is needle in a haystack. No paid/private hosting will kill this game, I'm sure of it.

Post by **Dr. kitteny berk** » October 18th, 2009, 18:59

Also, it makes no sense from a money standpoint.

Sure, they might get less pirates playing online, but a whole fuckload more people will download it if it's effectively a 5 hour singleplayer game with some shit multiplayer tacked on.

but, they'll also have to pay for however much bandwidth IW.net (and possibly hosting games themselves? (i've not watched the video)) where clans will usually pay for hosting etc.

Also, as far as I can tell, they'd've been able to do everything they wanted by going to a beef style ranked server system, and had avoided fucking off users as much as they have, and an extra moneysink.

Post by **FatherJack** » October 18th, 2009, 20:04

I don't like the direction shit is going in as gaming companies seek to homogenise gaming into the console model, by closing off perceived sources of revenue-loss. Perhaps desperate to tighten their belts, they forget that the customers and the peripheral industries are feeling the pinch, too.

Firstly second-hand game sales are attacked with non-transferrable licenses, then even new game resellers are hunted down with schemes like that used by Sony's new PSP - where the only games you can play on it are downloaded from the Sony store, and now companies that run dedicated servers are being targeted as well as clans and groups that run their own.

Shit, I'd rather play on a server full of pirates than against some lone brat who turns the server off when you beat him, but that's not even the point. It's the scattergun approach they use and the lack of actual knowledge of the issues where they seem to think every loophole closed instantly equals extra money for them.

Post by **Dog Pants** » October 18th, 2009, 20:47

This just makes me laugh. To be honest, it's just the excuse I need to not fork out an unreasonable amount of money for it. I hadn't even read this when I posted about the price in another thread. I'd take it with a pinch of salt, just because of how massively, self destructively backwards it sounds, but had I pre-ordered it I'd be cancelling it right now.

If it's true, think of it as a huge tree falling in the rainforest of PC gaming, allowing light to encourage the new growth of lots of little new trees. Because if it is true I doubt there'll ever be another COD title on the PC.

Baliame · Post by **Baliame** » October 18th, 2009, 21:21

Well, you can now state without fear of contradiction that Treyarch makes the good CoDs.

Post by **Dr. kitteny berk** » October 19th, 2009, 0:49

Baliame wrote:Well, you can now state without fear of contradiction that Treyarch makes the good CoDs.

Nah, it's just that IW made the good cods, then fucked up. hard.

I'm hoping this is either a mistake, or gets dealt with, because I'd quite like a new CoD.

Something moderately noteworthy: Assuming everyone who signed the petition is real, and would have payed $25 (yeah, I know $35 is more likely, but $25 is what I'd expect the merkinish standard price to be for a PC game)

Anyway, yeah, they're close to losing One Million Dollars of revenue, in 24 hours. And given that's just the people who are online at the weekend, and have noticed this, and given a crap enough to petition.

It's not a massive amount in the grand scheme of AAA titles, but If I noticed that, I'd start putting the dedicated server back in.

Akiakaiu · Post by **Akiakaiu** » October 19th, 2009, 4:42

Most new pc games are $40-50 for the bigger titles like this, the new Batman and Wolfenstein are both $49.99 on steam. I'd expect MW2 to be the same. Dragon Age special edition pre-order on steam was $59.99 iirc.

buzzmong · Post by **buzzmong** » October 19th, 2009, 10:19

Well, it's just under 50k now, and say it's going to be roughly $45 per game, using Berk's previous calculations, it's roughly equivilant to $2.25 million dollars.

Hmmm, wonder if they'll actually listen, after all the news sites have picked it up as well.

mrbobbins · Post by **mrbobbins** » October 19th, 2009, 11:22

This really is ridiculous, first time I read it I don't think I understood, "Can't really be that can it!" I thought.

Numpties, so now I pirate the game for the SP campaign, well done IW.

You can still set up private matches with specific players, but otherwise you rely on the matchmaking system to choose a server for you. No dedicated servers, no LAN matches.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/200 ... -servers/1

No servers and no LAN, way to alienate an ENTIRE platform

Lee · Post by **Lee** » October 20th, 2009, 12:57

94000

I've officially cancelled my pre-order now. I don't feel like waiting for confirmation that may never come in an attempt to cling on to whatever pre-orders they have left.

I was reluctant to pay the £30 that I pre-ordered for anyway, at least now I don't have to.

Post by **fabyak** » October 20th, 2009, 13:15

I have signed and 13 more have been added in the time it took me to find the view button

50 more about 2 minutes later, charging up to 95'000!

Post by **fabyak** » October 20th, 2009, 13:18

I spy Mr Johnson at the top of the list!

Mr. Johnson · Post by **Mr. Johnson** » October 20th, 2009, 13:54

Me? never!

it's just some guy that happens to have the same name and nickname, honest.

friznit · Post by **friznit** » October 20th, 2009, 13:57

Wasn't going to buy it anyway, but signing petition just cos it's funny as fuck

Post by **Grimmie** » October 20th, 2009, 13:58

IT'S OVER 95,000! Sort of.
So that's.. $4,275,000 in potentially lost revenue? Ouch.

Lee · Post by **Lee** » October 20th, 2009, 14:06

Grimmie wrote:IT'S OVER 95,000! Sort of.
So that's.. $4,275,000 in potentially lost revenue? Ouch.

Even more than that, it's $60 in the US and $57 converted here so round about $5,700,000

Lateralus · Post by **Lateralus** » October 20th, 2009, 14:44

Make that $5,700,057 in lost revenue, and +1 in signatures.

spoodie · Post by **spoodie** » October 20th, 2009, 15:20

You can't ignore a petition when it's on the Internet and has been signed by such respected persons as "IW Sucks". I've added Drama Llama, no doubt that will tip the scales.

Post by **Dr. kitteny berk** » October 20th, 2009, 15:49

spoodie wrote:You can't ignore a petition when it's on the Internet and has been signed by such respected persons as "IW Sucks". I've added Drama Llama, no doubt that will tip the scales.

Still, each of those represents a unique email address, and even if only 50% of the sigs are legit, that's still a fuckton of money.