BF2S Forums Your top 10 games of the decade (2000-2009)

androoz wrote:

Flecco wrote:

androoz wrote:

ok, cool. you quoted me? yeah?

Okay, explain to me how games coming out on multiple systems makes them an improvement? That's fucking retarded logic.


Removing dedicated server support was pretty much them shitting on PC gamers faces. The only reason CoD4 got funding was because PC players purchased 1 and 2 in droves, because they were rather good titles. CoD4, less good but still pretty decent. MW2 = crappy net code and very poor MP level design for the most part.

Okay well it has gotten rid of hackers mostly and has made the game more balanced with no dedicated servers. I think it's good that PC games are becoming more like console games.

Please be trolling.

androoz, I've run into more hackers in MW2 than in CSS in the past few months....


...

CSS for fucks sake. Also, it's less balanced. If the host is the owner of a good PC and net connection he gets a ping of 1 and has rego about 108451095813895 times better than the other players. Not to mention the ACR, killstreaks etc. etc.

It's not about being fussy, it's about relatively poor design decisions that make no sense. I own each CoD game on PC. There's a rather clear downward trend in quality after the first m8. Having supported the company by buying their games, I feel rather betrayed now.

androoz wrote:

TimmmmaaaaH wrote:

androoz wrote:

Okay well it has gotten rid of hackers mostly and has made the game more balanced with no dedicated servers. I think it's good that PC games are becoming more like console games.

Please be trolling.

No, actually I'm not. You guys are just too finicky and can't accept a good game.

I started gaming on consoles, beginning with the Intellivision, then graduating to the NES, SNES and Sega Genesis. In the mid-late 90's, I became solely a PC gamer, and in recent years I've gotten back into consoles in a way bigger way than before, thanks to not being a little kid with no money. So you can see, I'll be one of the first PC gamers to defend consoles for price/value, and I have gone to moderate lengths to do so in another recent thread here. By my own admission, consoles have some pretty awesome titles, and I'm sure that for the 360 or PS3, CoDMW2 is a pretty sweet game.

Since I am privy to both perspectives, allow me to explain in what I hope is an unbiased tone: PC gamers hate 'adapting' to a title in a series that advertises 'new' features that they've been using for years (keyboard/mouse, text chat). They hate it when a company nixes a great many features in a new title that was present in previous games in a series. PC gamers can tell (oh yes, we can tell) when a game has pretty much been developed with the console in mind, but only half-heartedly for the PC...if not an outright port. CoD6 didn't do a bad job compared to similar titles and ports. Where it fails in our eyes is that it in no way resembles a proper online PC game with high-population dedicated servers (not run by an arbitrarily-selected host), server browsing, detailed host options and mods. So we can't help but get the impression that IW would prefer to abandon PC development altogether, taking with it the franchise that was, alongside its genre itself, made successful by PC gamers. This is compounded by the fact that for some reason, IW saw fit to charge PC gamers more for a product with an inferior set of features compared to other games in the series. The twist of the knife occurs when the community apparently supports IW in this by telling CoD fans to go back to CoD4 is they don't like it.

Besides which, the lengths IW went to to lock down their game did not stop hackers or pirates.