Now that you have seen that, let me voice my opinion. Most of these don't matter at all to 99.999% of gamers. For instance: Console Commands, you know, the overlay pops up when you accidentally press the "~" key. With this console you can do (dumb) things like change weapon damage, remove perks, and otherwise change the game to your liking. Why is this an issue? You can't do this on the consoles, and no one complained about that. Infinity Ward's response was that they "want users to play the game the way they intended". Sounds fair to me.
Lean refers to the ability to lean side to side, to pop out around corners or "avoid headshots". This is a more utilized feature of previous games, but still not used by most people. In fact, I only "leaned" a few times in the time I played CoD4. Mod tools, Competetive mods, and custom maps are all something that less than 1% of gamers care about in the least. And all are pretty self explanatory, and oh yeah, absent from console versions.
A slew of these complaints are aimed at the decision to use IWnet for networking, and not have dedicated servers. This has been the biggest source of OUTRAGE (ahhh!) in this "controversy". As someone who has played PC games for years, I'm happy to see this change. I hate dedicated servers. To me they feel like an artifact from a decade ago. I want to pick what kind of game I want to play, and play. I don't want to scroll through lists of stupidly named servers looking for one that has 15/16 players, or is the appropriate "all hardcore shimpment 24/7 US l33tchannel" server. I just want to play the game. As long as I can add friends to play with, I'm good to go. As far as this "banning hackers" and "bad language" goes, hackers will be dealt with, and were never that big of a problem, and on the pc version "bad language" is hardly an issue. Unlike Xbox Live or PSN, PC gamers are older, and in any given match 25% or less are using mics, compared to 75% on the console networks.
Technically, CoD4 did support up to 64 players, although the box only says 32. 64 players was not possible unless you rigged some settings to allow for it, and those matches were rare, and utter chaos. Even 16v16 was chaotic, with grenade spam and high rate-of-fire weapons accounting for a huge portion of kills. If MW2 is balanced for 9v9, then so be it. Some of the best game I ever played were 8v8, and this isn't Counter-Strike, or BF2, so why the need for loads of bodies on the field?
The demo is something I would like to have seen, since knowledge of how well it will run would be nice. However, its built on the CoD4 engine, which runs as smooth as Source engine on my laptop, and so I have some idea of what it will do. A lot of games (read most) are coming to pc without a demo these days, and I don't know why, but it is annoying, especially when console owners get loads of demos.
As far as the "more for less" idea here, I have to disagree. What we are getting for pc is the same thing that console owners are buying. We get customizable graphics settings, mouse and keyboard control, and I'm sure a few small bonuses here and there. So if we get what console versions have, and a little more, why should we pay less? I would love if the price was lower, but in all honesty, that wouldn't make sense. There is nothing really more compelling about the console versions, other than the ability to play with more people and more friends. Even if I had an Xbox 360 or PS3, I would still be more swayed to the PC version for its better controls. These arguments really seem trivial to me, and certainly not grounds for ditching the game. People are calling this "the end of PC gaming", and I think thats totally incorrect. This is the beginning of a more user-friendly era of PC gaming, where you don't need to save servers, search for certain game types, and have to see annoying "Admin" messages loop on screen. I want to play CoD:MW2 for what it is, not what it could be made into. I'll see you in game on the 10th or 11th, best of luck if you're on the other team.
0 comments:
Post a Comment