Modern Warfare 2

The Game Room
61

The degree to which PC gaming is dying is exaggerated. Traditional market analysis and sales numbers don’t account for digital sales, which is becoming more dominant in PC gaming as time goes on. And this is good for the developers and publishers - the games sell at full price but have no shipping/shelf space/production/etc costs. They get more profit per unit sold.

Since the xbox 360 is basically just an underpowered PC coding for both platforms isn’t that hard. They both use DirectX. But the problem is… PCs are years ahead of consoles now in terms of technology, so when you co-develop for all platforms you end up with the lowest common denominator determining your design limitations. You can especially tell when you compare actual PC games which are miles ahead of codeveloped games, with the exception of multiplatform games that took extra time to improve the PC version. Between that and dumbed down gameplay, the actual quality of games available for the PC has been steadily declining since 2005 or so. So there’s legitimate reason for a market decline, and it’s the fault of the industry.

So PC gamers have sort of grumbled about accepting us being locked into 2005 technology in a field where what you can do with gaming improves at a very fast rate. But now we’re actually losing capabilities that we had before, not just halting progress. IW (and Rage and possibly other upcoming games) aren’t even giving the proper multiplayer model anymore. It’s a huge step backward and I’m glad to see there’s a big backlash. I hope it convinces developers not to shaft the PC version of games.

But it’s sort of a self fulfilling prophesy. The PC version of COD6 won’t sell well because it’s a substandard product worthy of boycott, and then IW will probably take the lesson of: “see? It doesn’t even sell on the PC, let’s not bother” instead of “woops, we fucked up”.

If you’re looking for a longer single player campaign you’ll be dissapointed. It’s shorter than the first game… the reviews say 6-7 hours, but people on forums I’m reading claim to be able to beat it in 3.

Edit: The upcoming release of Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 will give some idea of where the PC market stands.

62

Interesting, thanks. Why aren’t there more hugely successful and cool games like Fallout 3 on the PC? Me and my reclusive self generally prefer singleplayer gameplay by default, although I enjoy the multiplayer option too.

Why isn’t it profitable for Infinty Ward or whomever to make a more sandboxed version of a COD game with a gigantic singleplayer mode? Shit, wasn’t COD2 like six discs or something? That was really cool!

63

Fallout 3 is on the PC and it’s substantially superior in terms of graphics and gameplay because you can use any of thousands of mods to change the gameplay how you like it. If you’re asking why it’s not exclusively on the PC, it’s simply because the console market is huge, and because all the platforms are so similar now, it’s hard to justify not taking advantage of all markets by developing for all platforms. Games that don’t really fit on the console like RTS games, civilization type strategy games, simulators, etc. are still PC exclusives… and I would’ve thought FPS shooters would fit into that category too since they’re so fucking horrible on consoles but they’re wildly popular.

This approach isn’t totally doomed to failure. There are some games where they actually put real effort into making the PC versions of the game better than the console ones, but still made it on all platforms, like Mass Effect, Dirt 2, even COD4 and some others. But unfortunately crappy half-ass PC ports that basically are the same game as the console + keyboard and mouse support is where most of the trend goes.

64

No, I was asking why there aren’t MORE games on PC like Fallout 3 (FPS, open arena mapping) that are so very good? It appears people like them…modern computers certainly can run some amazing graphics now…if you had to break down a software company’s profit percentage of PC games versus console versions of the same games, where would that line be? 70/30?

65

I’m in Afghanistan. Can’t play it until Feb. Web connection is too slow to access any of the game websites for reviews because they all have too much flash and bling to load in a reasonable amount of time from here.

66

With regards to the PC market. There are certain games/genres that work best on PC and sell best on PC. Strategy games like Total War, Starcraft, Sim games like Silent Hunter, DCS Blackshark, MMOs etc.

Those games require at least moderately powerfull machines to run, so after investing money in a gaming PC it makes sense to play other games on the same system.

Of course the ironic thing is that with current consoles having internet connections one of the main advantages of console over PC is fast disapearing. Console games used to work right out of the box, now they can release buggy and patch after, just like PC games.

PS I have just started work so I have to wait another 8 hours before I can play CoD:MW2. I’ll try and get a multiplayer game going this evening and report back on IW.nets capabilities when playing on the far end of Africa.

67

Hmmm.

Just received my copy and I checked the printed manual. Under controls q and e are now special grenades and melee so the decision to remove lean was made months ago when this document was finalised. But there is still reference to ~ for console and f1 and f2 for voting as per previous CoD games. No reference at all to IW.net or any of the major changes to multiplayer. So rather than working on IW.net for the previous year as claimed, IW had PC multiplayer basically the same up until the point the manuals were finalised.
So at some point after the manual text was finished and the game shipped some bright spark decided to switch to p2p multiplayer.

Damnation, I had hoped to leave the office early but I doubt that will be possible now, only 4 hours to go.

68

The Onion News strikes again. Warning, not only does this link to a video, it’s really, really fucking funny: http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Modern-Warfare-3-Announced-By-The-Onion-21027.html

69

Fallout 3 was developed by Bethesda Software. Bethsoft is an anomaly among game developers. They self publish, which almost no one does, so they have the luxury of making precisely the game they want to make: massive single player RPGs. They’ve been saying for fifteen years that they don’t want to make an MMO and they appear to mean it.

Bethsoft is now owned by Zenimax, which also just bought id Software. Zenimax makes the mobile ElderScrolls games and is rumored to be working on an MMO of some kind. Beth’s involvement in that is anyone’s guess. Ditto for an id + Beth collaboration.

Bethesda made its name on the Elderscrolls games. They bought the Fallout IP a few years ago from the ruins of Interplay. Interplay was a legendary studio and responsible for some of the best RPGs ever, including Fallout, Planescape: Torment, and the Baldur’s Gate/Icewind Dale games. Interplay fell apart largely because the guy running them is a fuckwit and because they were bleeding money on trying to build (among other things) Fallout Online.

The bottom line for your question, FoisGras, is that single player RPGs like Fallout 3 or Dragon’s Age cost more to make and take much longer to make than most shooters - and they have a smaller market. Games like Fallout require massive amounts of writing and voice acting. Their reception hinges on how well they tell a story - where action games hinge on well they keep the pace. All that stuff costs a fortune.

Story driven games, especially ones that take 100’s of hours to finish, have a smaller market, just like story-driven movies and tv. The mass market is looking for something fast and easy to pick up. Most people don’t want to be bothered with moral dilemmas while their trying to relax (that’s not a judgment statement.) By being single player, you cut out the whole market of people who prefer to play with their friends.

So most publishers prefer to avoid AAA RPG titles because they tie up money and developer time and have a greater risk of return. Bethesda, like I said above, is their own publisher so they can do what they want. Very few companies can afford to do what Bethesda does.

I’m not going to tackle the numbers you ask about at the end of your question because there’s so many variables. There’s money to be made on all platforms, it just depends on a studio’s focus. PC gaming isn’t dead, by any means, it’s just doing different things. SenorBeef mentioned that sales numbers don’t often account for digital sales - the also don’t account for people paying monthly MMO fees. That’s where the really huge money is on the PC, atm. PC gaming is also home to most of the independent devs since they don’t have to get their efforts passed the console gatekeepers.

70

I’m sorry if I gave that impression then. PC gaming is most definitely not dead. trust me, between borderlands, Dragon Age, l4d2 and a handful of smaller games I’m playing, I hardly have time get away from my PC. There are a large number of games that do very well in a PC market. Most of your fps games play much different (IMO better) on PCs because of the more accurate and responsive controls. Go out at any given moment and there are thousands of people playing team fortress or counter strike.

RTS and city builders also perform much better because they are more suited to the control scheme of a mouse input. I’ve tried similar games on consoles and they’re never right because they controls have to be limited to allow for controller input. I don’t see how something like Total War or Sim City 4 would ever work on a console.

Then you’ve got things like the Sims. It’s a huge player base where the people spend countless hours and untold piles of money on DLC, and expansion pack. The players are addicted because they enjoy decorating new houses and playing god with the characters they design.

Beyond those big titles, you’ve got tons of independent games. Think of things like ‘Plants versus Zombies’ or any number of smaller $10-$20 games. They may not look like much, but there is a fairly large volume in cheap non-intensive games. Xbox was surprised when geometry wars became so insanely popular, but it’s the same crowd, and most of them play those simple games on their computer after checking their email.

But the big elephant in the room is MMOs. The massive amounts of income things like WoW pull in is staggering. Millions of players dumping $15/month is not a buisness model that is going away. Even less successful ones that get under 100K players still pull in millions.

The most important aspect to remember is that the PCs are dead crowd having been shouting that for about a decade. And the market hasn’t dried up yet. More importantly, look at this generation of consoles. Each of them is moving to become more like a PC. Attempting to integrate better graphics, and bigger online options. They’re becoming more complicated and have developed the same patching issues that were raised with PCs a decade ago. In effect, they’re becoming multimedia PCs that you hook up to your TV.

PC gaming isn’t dead. But, when you’re doing a huge $60 release with a major title, you have to look at the massive audience available on consoles. That’s a huge draw for companies like IW. That was my point with my comment.

I think that’s perfectly smart and reasonable that IW make the game work well on those platforms. But that doesn’t forgive them for downgrading the performance or abilities of the PC game. Dropping 32 person dedicated servers and pretending that 12 man listen servers are equivalent… that’s not only bad business, it’s insulting.

edit: I saw some rough outline numbers about a year ago that indicated that when you calculate MMO and digitial sales into PC games, the total is actually larger than both xbox and ps sales combined. Trying to find the link by I’m behind my work filter at the moment. try to find it later, unless someone else can find it sooner. I wanna say it was a stardock/impulse publication or something.

71

Thanks for the answers guys, quite informative. Please be sure to watch the Onion video I linked to about Modern Warfare 3…it really is entertaining!

And I also agree with the general thrust of this thread. I’m not a hardcore gamer, and I have a medium-level gaming system (I can run Crysis almost maxed out, for instance…which is another FPS title I really liked, btw), but when I got into multiplayer gaming with COD4, I was stunned at how much the server community had changed since the days of me playing Battlefield 1942 online. There are so…many…more…options its staggering. And to take that away by the developers does indeed smack of bad business decision-making (what, is Infinity Ward borrowing Microsoft’s business model, which is to say “We’ll tell you what you want and you’ll like it?”) especially in light of the fact that the cost of running the dedicated servers is not borne by the software development company (a fact I did not know). What a load of BS!

And if indeed Modern Warfare 2 has an even shorter single player campaign than COD4, then…fuck, I might not buy it after all. Games are expensive and I want to get hours of enjoyment, not frustration or repetition out of them.

72

Ugh. I really dislike Infinity Ward’s party system in multiplayer. You sit in a lobby, invite folks. You can’t juin your lobby with someone else’s. Instead, you all have to go individually (or they have to come over individually). Also, if you’re in the pregame lobby and it’s bringing in people to play against and you want to back out to pick up another player in your party, if the party leader goes back out, everyone else in the party is still in the pregame lobby unless they back out. If they do, they get back in the party, but not if the party leader backs completely out of the game. Then it orphans the players.

Not to sound like a broken record or anything, but Bungie’s party system was so much better than this one. This one really sucks ass.

73

Does anyone think that if there’s enough backlash over this that Infinity Ward will change the game? Patch it or whatever?

74

Activision (especially their CEO) seems to be extremely arrogant, so I’m not sure admitting they were wrong is going to be an option. Maybe some sort of half ass policy like “well, fine, we added dedicated servers as an extra feature but we’re keeping IW.net as our primary matchmaking system” face saving bullshit gesture, at which point 90% of the player base would switch over. I’m hoping for something like that.

But I don’t think they care. IW can go fuck themselves. They wouldn’t be where they are today without the support of the PC community, and many of the people who work for them are people who were noticed and hired because they were talented modders/mapmakers/etc for the first few games. But now they don’t give a shit about it.

So… I doubt it. I think they’re going to see the lack of sales and piracy numbers as proof that the PC platform isn’t worth supporting, not possibly dare admit they fucked up.

I would say there’s a better chance the pirate/hacker/homebrew community will come out with dedicated servers to work with pirated versions of MW2. Which would be sad and funny - people uninstalling their legitimate copies so they could get cracked ones to get a proper gameplay experience…

75

It took me a little over 6 hours to beat the game. It was fairly short, but I really enjoyed it. Some of the scenes midgame, the way they had the music go along with the views, was absolutely amazing.

So yeah, I really enjoyed the story. Some of the missions were a bit repetitive, but still fun to play.

I tried multiplayer last night. The game is barely out but there was already a guy who was level 39. That’s insane.

76

Any chance you could write them a thoughtful, strongly-worded letter explaining this position? Is there any chance at all that this issue is flying over the top execs heads and they don’t realize how bad they are fucking themselves and everyone else over?

I yearn for the days of COD2. Those six discs were some of the most fun single-playing experiences I’ve ever had. Now that was a long campaign. Not some six hour shot in the dark with awesome graphics and its over. That’s what I hated about COD4. I loved the single player game mode so much, I never wanted it to end. It was wicked cool. Heck, even my 7 year old son loved playing it.

77

IW heard. The dev team heard. The team leads heard. Even company executives heard it. It’s been in the buzz about the game since they dropped the bombshell a few weeks ago. Thus far, they’ve been publicly resolute in their decision, despite a fairly massive wave of protest, the petition, and a fair amount of bad press.

I don’t see how any letter, polite or not, would change their mind at this point. It’ll take an actually change in profits to make a difference. The sad part about it is that whenever PC sales are lower than expected, publishers just blame piracy and move on.

78

OK

Finally got home and got the game installed.

“iw4sp.exe has stopped working”
bugger, try multi,
“iw4mp.exe has stopped working”
double bugger.

OK vista has a bunch of updates downloaded, let the machine restart and install those updates. Problem solved.

Start the game. No setup options have to start playing first then you can get to setup. Run around boot camp, hmm lacks potatoes. Press escape, viola, options! Crank resolution up, reconfigure controls, back into game, looking good.

I haven’t had much chance to play single player but it loks like typical CoD gameplay. So single player looks awesome lets move on to multiplayer.

My first multiplayer match my ping is horrible, one little red square, the game is a lag fest I finish and then go do something else for two hours. When i come back there are more South Africans online so it finds a game where we all have four green bars, lag is greatly reduced. you can still feel the lag, it is no where near as smooth as on a dedi but it is easily playable. So as long as IW.net can actually find other nearby players matches will work.

When the game is working the multiplayer is fun but there are a number of changes that are annoying. First, the care package drops can give you a killstreak you haven’t unlocked yet, so I got chopper gunner while still on level 2 and got a huge number of kills with it. Second, the game gives you experience for everything, so your screen is filled with flashing text almost continously when in a firefight which obscure your view just a bit.

IW.net and matchmaking is not a substitute for proper servers but it can work after a fashion. The multiplayer has definitely been designed with the instant gratification crowd in mind and the overall feel has changed as a result.

One very cool new feature, you can have a titlebar over your user name when it flashes up on screen, i.e. after you kill someone. And one of the titles you can have is your country flag, so your opponents can see just who is fragging them.

79

Having recently replayed COD2, it’s good but still my least favorite COD game. It’s long, sure, but few of the scenes are excellent, with the rest felling like I’m clearing the same village over and over again. While the non-linear “clear objectives in any order you like” mechanic was a cool idea, they used it too much. That and the “kill a tank” objectives don’t seem as fun when the tank seems to be continually running away from you(like in one of the Russian missions).

COD4 felt almost perfect. It’s just the right length to tell it’s story and full of awesome the entire ride.

80

Maybe I’m just being nostalgic. Is COD3 even worth getting? I’ve heard terrible things about it, yet part of me wants to own the whole catalog. Shit, I don’t have COD5 yet, either, which I need to buy.

I wonder how long they can keep this series going and keep it realistic. They’ve probably dipped into the WWII well as much as they possibly can over three games now, and now they have two titles with modern weapons, etc. Can a Crysis-style evolvement be next? A nano-suit or something to spice things up?