Modern Warfare 3 To Have Dedicated Servers

Back in the mists of time there was this game called Modern Warfare 2, and it had a bit of a fling with the idea of not bothering to use dedicated servers on PC. This, as you might imagine, caused a bit of consternation among people who actually wanted to play the game in any sensible way. Fortunately for such people, it seems that this mistake won’t be repeated for the third iteration of the series. Speaking to Eurogamer, Beachhead’s Noah Heller said: “The big announcement today is that we’re supporting dedicated servers for PC, which is really cool.” Hooray! “And of course we’re working really hard right now on the customised version of Elite for the PC [versions of Call of Duty games], because it’s an open platform and has some challenges.” Mmm.


  1. tomatojustice says:

    Hooray, indeed. Though it is kind of sad that this sort of news is reason to celebrate. Oh THANK you SO MUCH for BASIC FEATURES!

    • Pointless Puppies says:

      That is, indeed, the sad state of gaming. Reminds me of people being elated that an upcoming game “only” has DRM that phones home on launch. I’m not blaming the people, I’m blaming the industry for bringing everyone’s standards down to such an obscenely low level.

      On the other hand, I don’t really want to be one of those people who manages to find something to whine about even when it’s good news, so hooray.

    • Renfield says:


      Exactly. Between this and Epic’s ‘the PC is decent after all’ congratulatory announcement, there is an awkwardly Orwellian tinge to these press releases.

    • Arona Daal says:

      “BASIC (?) Features”
      It is this greedy sense of entitlement thats kills the PC.

      From now on you will eat what is on the table or you will go to bed hungry!

    • AlphaCentauri says:

      Battlefield 3 “announced” features like 64 players maps, jets and going prone – things that where basic features in earlier Battlefield games. Yet I see noone complaining about this announcement? If you’re going to hate, then hate, but atleast open your eyes for others doing the same thing.

    • skurmedel says:

      You mean earlier Battlefield games like Battlefield 1942, Battlefield Vietnam, Battlefield 2 and Battlefield 2142?

      Unless you are counting the Bad Company games as part of the “main branch”. Bad Company 2 have no jets and fighters, but it has dedicated servers albeit only from approved “hosts”. But it seems more like a spin-off to me.

      The only exceptions in my opinion is Battlefield 1943 (we didn’t even get it on PC) and Heroes.

    • Eukatheude says:

      64 player maps are not a feature of all decent multiplayer games.

    • Bilbo says:


      If I had my way misusing “Orwellian” would carry some kind of punitive sentence. Have you seen what’s happening on our fucking streets?

    • Renfield says:

      @ Bilbo

      With respect, I did not misuse it.

      Regardless of other, more prominent and more dangerous instances, this particular recent tendency of game developers to announce the return of some feature or product they previously went out of their way to disparage and dismiss, *in a manner suggesting that we should thank them for not taking away our feature or product anymore*, is very much Orwellian.

      And I don’t even care about dedicated servers!

  2. dirtyword says:

    That Battlefield trailer yesterday may have been the final nail in their coffin for me.

    • suibhne says:

      The crap-ness of their last two games was that nail for me.

    • Commisar says:

      what is wrong the the trailer, I am sorry that BF3 isn’t BF2 with a shiny new engine, but it isn’t a carbon copy. it is a sequel with its own ideas and gameplay. I personally will be having a blast on launch day.

    • AreChaos says:

      Don’t know whether it’s for buying or not. For me however it looks like a BF2 with upgraded graphics. It looks like BC2/MoH too. The reason why it’s getting so much hype is because of the recent MW hate that’s been going on, most of the people on the youtube comments are nothing but flamewars between these two games. As for MW3, they really have not added anything new to it, we haven’t seen MP yet but I can bet it’s the same thing over and over again. Announcing DS means nothing since this is something all PC MP should have. This year however there has been many other titles that are a good fresh air, like DOTA2, huge fan of MOBA games tried LoL wasn’t that great for me, HoN neither, but DOTA2 looks like the right spot.

      Another game is Diablo 3, yes there is hate, but how long since I haven’t played Diablo man, that’s such a good game with friends. Another game even though it’s another shooter is Rage, that’s because I have been waiting for that since 07, to me it’s looking pretty good. Then you have Skyrim, GW2 and of course the great Counter-Strike is coming. There are too many games coming out to just get one game or praise one game.

  3. KBoogle says:

    “Big announcement”? Dedicated servers are a basic thing. It’s like “announcing” that the next game they make will have gameplay! Or sound! Or will support monitors!

    • Bilbo says:

      That just isn’t the world we live in anymore and I think you realise it

    • Jeremy says:

      They took away a feature that everyone wanted, and put it back in after realizing they had made a bad decision. That’s worth being happy about.

    • Bilbo says:

      Well I think it is, anyway, but apparently we’re in the minority here

    • Jeremy says:

      It’s the classic tale of the spurned lover…

    • Bilbo says:

      “It’s going to take more than dedicated servers to win me back *pout* Dice would never treat me like this, Bad Company 1 and 2 totally held up as games and weren’t consolized crap”

    • Magnetude says:

      Bilbo, I don’t understand. You say that a world without dedicated servers as standard (a decision made to fit in with consoles) is the world we live in now, implying we should just shrug and accept this ‘streamlining’. Then you denounce the Bad Company games as ‘consolised crap’, as if consolising is now something we should reject fiercely.

      If I didn’t know better I’d think you were just trying to rile us up!

    • Bilbo says:

      I’m saying the announcement that a game that had dropped dedi servers is putting them back in is a good thing, and I’m saying while we’re slinging mud and glorifying dice we should probably spare a moment to reflect on what garbage the bad company games were. Not expecting a whole lot of support for my point of view but I’m doing that rare thing where I judge the game on its presentation, gameplay and general entertainment value, and not its’ business plan or its web service. But I realise that ain’t how we do it here, bro.

    • Daiv says:

      Monitors are just not “contemporary” any more.

    • MisterT says:

      Bilbo, I’d be inclined to agree with you, except the bad company games were a spinoff series BC1 wasnt even released on PC, and good features like Command wheel are in BF3.
      However, neither have mod tools, because the industy sucks nowadays.

    • Bilbo says:

      That’s kinda my point though – Dice basically walked away from the platform for years and yet everyone’s all excited because they happen to have cut the PC in on the deal this time

    • Jeremy says:

      I think the contradiction I struggle with is that a company that was attacked(rightfully) for ditching dedicated servers, is now being mocked for bringing that back. Even if it is a supposedly basic feature, it still bears mentioning since it was such a point of contention during the MW2 release.

  4. Teddy Leach says:

    I will not buy this unoriginal crap.

    • Bilbo says:

      Yeah, get Battlefield 3 instead, that’s super original

    • Stochastic says:

      Let’s just wait until both games are released before we pass judgement. It’s only fair.

    • Highstorm says:

      Will do, thanks for the tip!

    • mkultra says:

      Why wait till release when you can play the open beta?


      When’s the last time you could say that about a FPS?

    • treat says:

      I am, in fact, very happy to have this free time open up over the next several months so that I can finish some books and perhaps pick up a new hobby. Thanks, AAA game juggernauts, for making reading (more) fun (than your games) again!

    • Malk_Content says:

      @ Bilbo: You do realize that the OP (and the other one above in which you mention Battlefield) didn’t say anything about buying Battlefield. Unless of course I missed the memo that anyone not buying CoD must be buying Battlefield and thus we should comment on their choice.

    • Bilbo says:

      Kinda just based it on all the BF3 love in the thread.

    • YeOldeSnake says:

      At MoH 2010 , oh wait , DICE game .
      @other people
      DICE actually treats us better than activision , a notable example being the free mappacks for BC2.
      You cannot compare the progress the battlefield series have made with the progress call of duty has (which in fact returns an error 404).
      Why purchase a 50$ game which is exactly the same as the one before, or pay 40$ for something else that does everything better. I surely prefer 64 players over 32 or 16 , and physical bullets instead of raycasting , and destruction instead of static meshes , and vehicles , and support for teamwork.
      Call of duty has evolved into a generic shooter , in which you have no other role than to run around shooting people with a gun , as if it was quake , while Battlefield 3 offers way more than that.
      Sure , if you are a teenager full of testosterone who wants mindless raw shooting action then yeah sure , go buy MW3 , you will be doing us Battlefield gamers a favour to deprive us of your presence , you wouldnt understand the teamwork anyway.
      Having that said , i am in favour of the title being available on Steam , and do not support Origin in any way , i hope it gets resolved.
      Correction , i hope EA stops being stubborn supporting their platform.

    • godgoo says:

      Why not just accept that most of the comments that try to succinctly sum up one unreleased product by comparing it to another as yet unreleased product are either mild trolls who just like the attention or utter fools.

      PC gaming now and PC gaming 10 or even 5 years ago are incomparable in many ways, the whole games industry has changed too much. Why not look at an announcement such as this with some resigned ambivalence; yes our shrivelled PC-centric brains know that the waning current gen is having some cynical effect on big companies and their money powers, so why not just accept that for now this is a good thing for anyone who would like to play the next COD on PC (fair enough) and stop trying to convince the world that either COD/BF are crap/pure monkey gold.

      You’re either preaching to the converted or barking up the wrong bush. And adding nothing intelligent or positive in the process.

    • Malk_Content says:

      @ Bilbo

      Then reply to all of those. Bringing it up when it wasn’t mentioned by the OP isn’t providing some sort of balance to the other posts, bringing it up with them will (I know you have, but it should be left there.) As it is it looks like your trying to take every opportunity to bash Battlefield which doesn’t paint you in a good like. Just like CoD bashing in a thread that doesn’t mention it and a story that doesn’t mention it is kinda unwarranted.

    • Bilbo says:

      “fuck you I won’t do what you tell me” etc

    • rayne117 says:

      bilbo confirmed for trolling l0ser troll confirm bilbo

      blocking initiated

    • Bilbo says:

      Straight back at you, “Guy who’s only comment I’ve ever seen is a block threat Guy”

  5. Njordsk says:

    Good on them.

    But I’ll play BF3


  6. Nallen says:

    So they saw the BF3 trailers, bricks were shat, suddenly decided to try and start winning the PC customers back?

    I have a feeling they’ll have to do better than just telling us returning a feature they removed for no good reason is really cool.

  7. Sothis says:

    To be honest, I really don’t care any more.

    They’ve shown they simply don’t care for PC gamers by ripping essentials out from it previously without a care. The fact they think this is an “announcement” is disappointing in itself. This is something that should be built into the game by default.

    Grind more money elsewhere activision. I will be over with the rest of the people who watched that Battlefield trailer and realised where their money should be spent.

    • Bilbo says:

      “We realise we’ve got it wrong in the past, and we’re trying to make it right in our new games, guys! :) <3"


      D': *suicide*

    • Stochastic says:

      Bilbo, I understand what you’re saying and it’s a completely valid point. However, I don’t blame the people who so cynical/jaded about the Modern Warfare series. It’s going to take more than a small about-face to regain the goodwill Activision have lost.

    • Bilbo says:

      Totally, but most people are seemingly in the “Fuck you activision” camp rather than the “Ok, but it’s probably not going to be enough to win us back” camp.

    • Tatourmi says:

      I completely agree Bilbo, that comment made my day ^^.

      (And I also agree that it might not be enough yet, but well, at least that is something)

  8. DrGonzo says:

    You can play MW1 with dedicated servers, or Cod 2 for that matter, they are all the same game.

    People complain about Fifa being released yearly, CoD is completely unnacceptable, at least football games get better year after year.

    • Ultra-Humanite says:

      People need to respond with their purchasing power. If several million people are going to buy a Call of Duty game ever 6 months, who can blame them for making a Call of Duty game every 6 months? In a business sense it would be unacceptable for them not to make the games as fast as they can be produced.

    • Teddy Leach says:

      Most of the people who buy this crap are console gamers. A lot of console gamers either don’t know or don’t care about the industry. They’re not going to stop.

    • Bilbo says:

      Those naughty people buying things they like, ruining it for the rest of us who experience things on a higher plane of consciousness than they do

    • Magnetude says:

      Bilbo: £10 map packs consisting of slightly remodelled maps from the last game, 4 times a year, to enhance a game that they sell at £10 above RRP purely because they know they can.

      That’s what CoD represents. It’s a fun game, but it represents the commercial side of games at its absolute worst.

    • Bilbo says:

      No argument here. I just really hate the attitude of “I know better than the common man for I have a keyboard!”, it’s fucking low. Why don’t we just sterilise them all

    • Magnetude says:

      Well, in fairness, we do. The kind of people who buy this on console think that it’s harder to aim with KB+M and that the graphics are worse on PC. These are people who play nothing except CoD. What Teddy said is true, he wasn’t saying these people are worse than us, but they don’t know anything about games which is why they keep buying the same one, every year.

    • Ultra-Humanite says:

      Yes, we should sterilise console users. What a brilliant idea.

    • Bilbo says:

      Well most of the online community migrates to the title with the newest features and most up-to-date presentation so they’re sort of forced into buying the newest edition – hard to blame them. That said, I don’t think I’ve ever seen it written anywhere that all the millions of people who buy call of duty think mouse and keyboard is less precise or that PCs have weaker graphics power than consoles do. Or written by any of them, actually.

      This is all a moot point, because your logic is flawed – you judge Games based on your criteria and they theirs, using different criteria doesn’t make your end result better – if it did I could honestly stand here and say to you “Half-Life is shit, paintballing is much better” and you’d be hard pressed to argue

      Also while we’re at it @Ultra-Humanite Call of Duty 2003 Call of Duty 2 October 2005 Call of Duty 3 November 2006 Call of Duty Modern Warfare November 2007 Call of Duty World at War November 2008 Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 November 2009 CodBLOPS November 2010 Modern Warfare 3 November 2011 – every single one at least 12 months apart, or *double* the amount of time you stated – at least them stupid console gamers wot don’t know nuffink about the games industry know how to fucking count.

    • Grape says:

      @ Bilbo:

      Well, aren’t we really rather butthurt.

    • Bilbo says:

      Not really. Great contribution by the way, your parents must be proud

    • mondomau says:

      Fuck me. Pack it in guys, it’s embarrassing. Disagree by all means, but this snide sarcasm and elitism is better suited to the darker recesses of Kotaku or Reddit.

  9. Lewie Procter says:

    But will it support keyboard and mouse? Will it have graphical settings?

    • Teddy Leach says:

      Not without DLC.

    • Bilbo says:

      Someone had a big slice of troll pie for tea

    • Teddy Leach says:

      Trolling, mmm? D’aww, you were doing so well.

    • Bilbo says:

      You fired my troll detector with the idea that mouse+kb and graphics options will be DLC. Maybe I need to get the thing recalibrated. The “D’aww i’m patronising xD” shit can go straight back up your jaxie where you got it from, though. Deal? I’ll get my troll detector rekerjiggered and you’ll shove the patronising crap back in your copious rectum?


    • Teddy Leach says:

      And it’s in with the knee-jerk hostility and out with the sense of humour!

    • Magnetude says:


    • Premium User Badge

      SeanybabeS says:

      I think you just ruined their next two announcements.

    • Bilbo says:

      It’s not knee-jerk. I’m always fucking hostile to patronising arses. Although to my sensibilities what I just said was pretty humorous I have to say

    • indigohjones says:

      Resolutions over 1280×720 will be in-game unlockables

    • Bent Wooden Spoon says:

      Slightly ironic there Bilbo – you come across as the most patronising, humourless arse on this whole thread, regardless of peoples’ opinions one way or the other.

    • Bilbo says:

      Example pls

    • Bent Wooden Spoon says:

      Patronising: Pretty much everything you’ve written in the last page (can’t be arsed reading further) is condescending, sneery and dismissive and seems to start from the presumption that everyone who disagrees with you is a whiny muppet. You’re not stating your opinion, you’re not arguing any points, you’re just being a cock.

      Humourless: See your reaction to Teddy Leach’s first post above. Also related to your behaving like a condescending, sneery, dismissive cock.

      You make some damned good points, but your window dressing is shite.

    • Bilbo says:

      I’ll take the compliment, to be honest. I’ll be the first to admit I treat everyone else like dogshit with my tone, but it gets results

    • Tatourmi says:

      Permit me to doubt it. I don’t think that insulting people will get you anywhere. The initial reaction when one is insulted is pretty much always the same in my experience: Going against. Even though you might or might not have a point this is going to be the reaction you trigger. Discussions are not supposed to be deathmatch, they are supposed to be coop mode. You want to achieve a common goal, to actually become one with the other in terms of thoughts, and for that aggressivity is unnecessary (God that came out seriously fucked up, well, no bother). But well, I might be wrong as I am indeed just talking about my own experience, which is and will always be, I reckon, limited.

    • Bilbo says:

      I don’t really have it in me to cooperate with the kind of people I usually wind up arguing with. Pretentious and self-righteous dickheads who will say something like “We know better than the console gamers” completely deadpan and don’t shy away from the idea that they genuinely appreciate things on a higher plane of understanding than their fellow man. There’s really no cooperating with people that fucked up, you kinda just have to unleash a few word bombs and get the fuck out of there

    • Bent Wooden Spoon says:

      See, I can’t disagree with you there. I think those people are complete tools too, but that’s no reason to start behaving like one. There aren’t that many comments along those lines here – instead you’re coming across as the immature, idiotic, reactionary troll dribbler you seem to be saying you’re railing against.

      Mondomau sums it up best:

      “Fuck me. Pack it in guys, it’s embarrassing. Disagree by all means, but this snide sarcasm and elitism is better suited to the darker recesses of Kotaku or Reddit.”

  10. Bilbo says:

    And there was much rejoicing. This thing about being frightened of the PC as an open platform and “customising” Elite to compensate sounds fairly unpleasant, though.

  11. skinlo says:

    I don’t care, BF3 is where its at.

  12. ReV_VAdAUL says:

    I’m kind of surprised they’re bothering with PC at all at this point. They showed utter disdain for it at a time when there was no real competition for the crown. Now BF3 seems to be leagues ahead of them on the PC it would seem prudent to cut their losses and hope they can compete with the scaled down console version of BF3.

    • Ultra-Humanite says:

      I’m skeptical that Battlefield will usurp the crown. Their game looks better, but better doesn’t always mean it will sell more.

    • ReV_VAdAUL says:

      @Ultra-Humanite That is a very fair point. Still, there was a bit in PCGamer a couple of issues ago about how the BF3 booth at E3 was considerably more popular than MW3’s. That of course doesn’t anything conclusive but does suggest BF3 is at least a strong contender.

      Still though, if they had such contempt for the PC up to now why put such half-hearted effort in now they’re faced with a real contender. Stick with what you prefer and retain your console stranglehold.

    • Ultra-Humanite says:

      They must think there’s still blood left to squeeze out of that rock. But seriously, for all the poo-pooing that people do, and mostly justified, about Call of Duty, it does still do well enough on PC to make it worth their while. Look at the numbers playing the Call of Duty games on the Steam page sometime, I wouldn’t call that an insignificant number of consumers and is clearly not representative of the entire Call of Duty playing population on the PC. And even if you do hate Call of Duty and plan on buying Battlefield 3, you should still want Activision, or anybody really, making a competing title. Otherwise DICE will just get fat and lazy milking their own franchise.

    • ReV_VAdAUL says:

      Damnit Ultra-Humanite stop making such good points, you’re making me look bad!

      I can’t really argue with any of your points there so I shall slink away.

    • Ultra-Humanite says:

      Your sentiments aren’t unfounded. Activision doesn’t really seem to understand the definition of the word “fan service.”

    • Magnetude says:

      On PC, BF3 may well outsell CoD. But it’s going to take at least two more lacklustre sequels before people get bored of it. It’s basically the new Fifa.

      On the plus side, maybe we’ll all get burned out and the industry’s unhealthy obsession with first person shooters will finally end!

  13. Carra says:

    Damn it. For a second there I was happy to see they were working on a new Elite.

    • ReV_VAdAUL says:

      Would you really want to see an Activision version of Elite, with DLC and dumbed down rubbish?

    • Carra says:

      Yeah, it would probably end up being a man shoot game in space.

  14. Aspongeinmauve says:

    I doubt the addition of a basic feature will make the multiplayer any less boring and broken.

  15. JonClaw says:

    Fool me once (Modern Warfare 2) shame on you.
    Fool me twice (Black Ops) shame on me.
    I won’t be fooled again (MW3).

  16. Nalano says:

    Too little,

    too late.

  17. WolVenom says:

    Its sad that this is news nowdays… it should be in every PC game.

  18. Dakia says:

    I’m going to have to agree with some of the other poster on here that this far too little, far too late.

    IW and Activision have already shown their willingness to flat out lie to their PC consumer base as was seen all to frequent with the marketing of MW2. How can we, as consumers ever take companies like this fully at their word?

    Simply put, this is damage control because the battle is lost on the PC front.

  19. transresistor says:

    My friends and I loved the quick jump-in-and-play MW2 setup. We initially thought we’d hate it, but we never had to wait or deal with find a server that was just some clan’s newbling stomping ground. I know the upsides to dedicated servers, sure, but I also really enjoyed the new challenge that every match would represent when the game would serve up in a nice, effortless, endless flow. I wonder if that’ll be an option.

    • chopsnsauce says:

      I heard that MW3 will have matchmaking AND servers, but dont’ quote me.

      I’m with you on matchmaking, MUCH easier than wading through a list of servers that are full, password protected, only have 1 map in the rotation, knife only, etc. etc.

    • MisterT says:

      Doubt it,
      prepare your anus for 24/7 [smallest, not very balanced map] 18 player messes where 12 y/o admins ban you for killing them before they get their nuke.

  20. Tei says:

    I think Modern Warfare 2 was a good game, perhaps damaged by the lack of dedicated serie (I know the lack of DS ruined my experience with the game, I don’t know others). MW3 will be a even better game than MW2.

    Also WTF with you guys? Who made this photo at GamesCon?

    • MisterT says:

      I think MW2 was downright awful
      stopping power, one man army, danger close, 25m OHK without aiming at target SPAS-12, and grenade launchers all made it the worst MP game I’ve ever played, but if you found those things to be fun, all the power to you.

      I’ll have fun with other contemporary manshoots.

    • Dakia says:

      LOL, that pic cracks me up.

  21. Rambone says:

    By my reckoning, this game should have been released 6 days ago. Steam is advertising it as 11.8.11.

  22. Phinor says:

    Now they need to only add playable FOV (like in Black Ops) and this game is on my mindless manshooter games list. Don’t get me wrong, BF3 all the way, but sometimes you feel like shooting in a more casual way. Just sometimes.

  23. Arona Daal says:

    Yeah , great but….If it has no Dinosaurs in it,i will not buy it!

  24. Arca says:

    They came to their senses! Yay!
    Too bad I will be playing Battlefield 3.

  25. JoeFX69 says:

    I thought it was “cool” when they didnt have dedicated servers because it enabled “better matchmaking”?


    • db1331 says:

      Don’t you remember when they said how confusing it is to navigate a server browser? You have to search for shit you want, like the game type or map, then hit join. That shit was rough. They wanted “people who like our game to just be able to play.”

  26. db1331 says:

    If I had to choose one or the other, I would take BF3 hands down. I may wind up getting both eventually though. They are two different types of game to me. When I play a BF game, I want to run with my squad mates, use strategies and tactics, drop med kits and ammo boxes. When I play CoD, I want to “bunny hop”, dolphin dive, run and gun, and talk shit to people. This is not a knock on BF, because in the long run I prefer it, but CoD games are just much more fast paced. You can kill 8 guys in 30 seconds in CoD, which is something you don’t get in BC2 (excluding helicopter spam). Now odds are I will be totally engrossed in BF3 and Skyrim when MW3 comes around, so I might not end up picking it up until I’m ready for a little change of pace from BF3. That doesn’t mean I will like MW3 more. It just means I wanted a little strange.

  27. Big Murray says:

    The problem is that you know when they say it’ll have dedicated servers, they mean it’ll have dedicated servers for about 18 months. Then they’ll turn them off and tell you to buy the new game that’s out if you want them.

  28. nihlus says:

    Crawling back to PC and dedicated server.

  29. deathguise says:

    Pretty much the worst news of the week. Finally thought that we’d get an FPS where you can play as you want, and kill who you want. Not so it seems. MW2 had the best idea, no kicking or banning, and no rules enforced. If you want to play with a set of rules you made up and you think are fun, go play a private match with your friends! Don’t subject the rest of us who want to play the game the devs made.

    Dedicated servers are a pain in the ass unless the company making the game provides local, offical, ‘vanilla’ servers where you can use guns how you please and not get permabanned if you shoot the wrong people too many times. Black Ops had this problem in droves, especially due to the fact that you had to pay Acti for the privelidge of letting you host a server, and the offical servers were high ping and always full. I’m fairly sure I’ve been banned from most UK-based COD:BO servers just for refusing to take their rules crap. But what option do I have? Play with bots in a private match, yeah, awesome, totally what the devs intended.

    I get that these people spend their own money to forge their own little communities, however, what about the rest of us who can’t afford a server, or server hardware, just the game? Nope, can’t play by the rules set by the designers and developers, you have to do what the 14-year old running the server tonight says, and got forbid you headshot him too many times in a row, as then you’re obviously cheating, and all the regulars will vote in his favour.

    Not a troll, not that anyone will belive that.

    • Dakia says:

      How was being stuck in a P2P game with hate speech spewing children, TKers, hackers, glitchers, and general a-holes with absolutely no recourse any better?

      At least with DSes, the community tends to police themselves. Those servers with asinine rules already tended to be ignored and not all that populated.

    • deathguise says:

      Children could be muted and you didn’t have to play hardcore. Hacks were uncommon in my experience and hilariously easy to counter, nothing like an aimbotter who can’t shoot through your riot shield as you mash his skull in.

      As for ‘asinine’ rules, freedom is better than restriction, especially when the most popular servers will always have some rule that makes them not worth playing.

    • DazedByTheHaze says:

      The main reason for liking dedi’s should have to be latency. If you don’t care if you have 20 or 100ms delay, you shouldn’t start discussions over dedis. You allready don’t care about your gameplay expirinence right now, so don’t mess with others who care.

    • deathguise says:

      I care a lot about my gameplay experience, that was in fact the whole point of my post, so not sure where you’re getting the idea that I don’t from. In regards to latency, on average I found it to range from 12 to 60ms when playing a game such as CS:S, when playing MW2 with the show ping enabled, my latency usually hovered around 30 to 70, a bit over a dedi, but barely. Sure, if I played late into the morning I’d start joining Europeans, and have a ping of 80-100, but the same could be said for joining a similarly distanced dedi.
      My point is, a good host can be as good as an average dedi, who knows, with better coding a good host could be as good as a good dedi, but without more games advancing the system, we won’t know.

  30. JohnnyMaverik says:

    Well Black Ops had dedicated servers and that was still a disaster at, and for some time after launch. Also dedicated servers is news? A sad state of affairs.

    Colour me cynical.

  31. Choice says:

    Well… Well .. Well..

    Sounds like plenty of you are not satisfied with these big name studio games pumping out worthless hyped pablum …

    So why bother messing around and settling?

    Get a mans FPS- that takes ability, skills and a brain..

    Red Orchestra 2-

    Made by FPS gamers .. for FPS gamers.

    • JohnnyMaverik says:

      Just a guess but I imagine most RPS readers are. I know I won’t be getting MW3 on release unless a miracle happens and it has a shit hot SP campaign, as I didn’t and still haven’t picked up Black Ops pre, during or even post release.

  32. Fleedar says:

    IWNet has many faults, but its team matchmaking feature made every one of them completely worth it. Having nothing but a server browser is great if you’re playing by yourself, but it makes it next to impossible to find a game with a group of friends and play on the same team with them.

    In MW2, you can just join a lobby with everyone, pick your game type, and you’re quickly put on a server and on the same team with each other. It’s the main reason I still play the game two years after its release, and I’m very sad to hear that the system might be abandoned in MW3.

  33. jay35 says:

    Next year: Call of Doody: Brown Ops.

    • Jeremy says:

      Against my will, I must admit this gave me a chuckle. I am not proud of it though!

  34. deadstoned says:

    Good. But will this COD game actually work on launch this time?

  35. Conor says:

    How lovely!

  36. Shooop says:

    …Wha? You mean someone making a CoD game realizes how insanely idiotic P2P only connections are on PC? Amazing.

    Well shame it won’t change the fact the game itself is literally MW2 with different guns though. This year’s a real bust for FPS games.

    • Choice says:

      Red Orchestra 2… everything else is training wheels console crap.

    • Shooop says:

      Only problem is I really don’t like WII weapons Choice. Last chances to salvage this year for me lies in Rage and Serious Sam 3.

  37. virtualmatrix258 says:

    Hahaha!! People are going to buy this? Are you kidding me? Geez, if you’re going to play this than you’re better off being a console mouth breather.

  38. mickygor says:

    Well it beats KB/M support and text chat as far as their PC features announcements go…

  39. neolith says:

    Well… nice. Kinda. But too little too late. I’ll play something else.

  40. pepper says:

    Hmm, she still looks like a psycho, I suppose that’s good. Cant say I have ever played any of the games. Especially the make up round the eyes. She kinda looks like she is ready to rip a head of a torso.

    She would probably be a good match up for Serious Sam.