This irks me. You have a dedicated fan base of fps-ers, that have basically kept your games on the map because of MODS and loyalty, and they insist on slapping us in the face! I swear, I will become a WoW nerd (hardcore) if this continues to become the trend.

Its all about money, the gaming companies have hardcore businessmen as leaders instead of enthusiasts as it was in the beginning

I know you need more people the problem though is my COD4 skills suck and I play like a madman since I bought UT3.

I could get on more but I think about MW2 and other things and I don't really get in the COD spirit.

OK OK you guys convinced me: I will never buy MW2

"jackass douche nozzles" rofl wth

I think in part it's the developer's moving to favour consoles over PC that is causing them to drop dedicated servers. Having to sift through a list of ping times and server flags to find the game you want is not considered user friendly and so they're trying to dumb the process down by removing dedicated servers for casual and console gamers who know little to nothing about these things.

Personally I don't like it, however with internet connections getting faster all the time the possibility of not needing dedies is becoming more and more feasible. The problem I have is the complete lack of control we get with these new systems. How many times have we had to return to lobby in L4D because it picked a laggy server, or a low gravity server, or 16 player modded server? If they just trusted users to be smart enough to pick their own server (something I think 90% are capable of - people are pretty computer literate and learn quickly these days) all those annoyances would be eliminated.

I think the way L4D and L4D2 gaming is set up works for it, with the only bad part being that the lobby leader usually has the server advantages.
I'm a younger member, but I still like having to set up a browser to my liking. I would hate having to jump into a Headquarters or FFA game on CoD4, since those are the modes I like the least. Perhaps the PC version was made exactly like the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions to make less work for the producer, or to dumb things down for the noobs that don't know how to work a computer.

Sigh

Quote:

Kotick hopes for Call of Duty "online subscription service" by Alec Meer Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick has expressed interest in creating a paid online world based on the Call of Duty series. Speaking to the Wall Street Journal last week, he revealed his interest in making the shooter a fee-based product. "I would have Call of Duty be an online subscription service tomorrow," he said. "When you think about what the audience’s interests are and how you could really satisfy bigger audiences with more inspired, creative opportunities, I would love to see us have an online Call of Duty world. "I think our audiences are clamoring for it. If you look at what they’re playing on Xbox Live today, we’ve had 1.7 billion hours of multiplayer play on Live. I think we could do a lot more to really satisfy the interests of the customers." While he said this was something he would want to do with "a snap of his fingers", his response to whether the company was actively looking at it was simply "hopefully." Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 was 2009's biggest-selling title, shifting some 20 million units. This year's Call of Duty: Black Ops sports the long-running series' highest number of pre-orders to date. Reply With Quote

OK, this is becoming complete BS. He is obviously a console player, noting ONLY the amount of time played on the Xbox Live service. As of checking right now on Xfire.com, CoD4 has had 95,104 hours of gameplay JUST TODAY. That pales in comparison to what MW2 has so far today, just 30,646 hours so far. That's not even A THIRD of what CoD4 has. I mean, ffs, CoD2 has more time than MW2. How bad is it when the second game in the chain has more time than the most recent? This guy is talking about "satisfying the interests of the customers." Oh really? To accomplish this goal, he needs to take his head out of his ass, brush his teeth so no more shit comes out of his mouth, and pay attention to the large amount of the customers that he lost when he didn't listen to all of them.

Sigh again.


http://www.fpsadmin.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20610

Quote:

If Activision Blizzard CEO, Bobby Kotick, has his way, a future generation of television-compatible PCs could, perhaps, provide a viable alternative to a videogame consoles, according to a report by the Financial Times. In comments related to discussing the subscription revenue enjoyed by Microsoft for Xbox Live, and Activision’s desire to run their own suscription-based service for franchises like Call of Duty, Kotick revealed that he believes the gateway to this goal could be expanding the scope of PCs with regard to gaming, given the open nature of the platform. “We’ve heard that 60 per cent of Microsoft’s subscribers are principally on Live because of Call of Duty,” Kotick commented. “We don’t really participate financially in that income stream. We would really like to be able to provide much more value to those millions of players playing on Live, but it’s not our network.” The Blizzard-developed World of WarCraft is presently a major source of subscription-based revenue for the company, so it’s easy to understand why Kotick, an outspoken proponent of subscription-based payment models, is keen to replicate this success with his company’s other franchises. One step toward this goal, he says, will be to “very aggressively” support efforts by Dell and HP to connect PCs to televisions, with the help of “gamer friendly” PCs built for this purpose. “We have always been platform agnostic,” he continued. “Consoles do a very good job of supporting the gamer. If we are going to broaden our audiences, we are going to need to have other devices.”