One More Update on MW2

Just in case IW hasn't convinced any PC gamers yet that it doesn't care about them, Best Buy recently hosted an online chat with Mackey McCandlish and Ryan Lastimosa from IW. Aside from further confirming that there are no dedicated servers and that 9vs9 will be the maximum game size, they also dropped a few more bombs. Here's some of what they had to say.

Q: Is there a console in the PC version of the game, so we can change our field of view from the xbox's default 65 FOV to 80 also can we tweaks the weapon damage for each gun, removes perks, graphical debris, breathing sway, also thru console like we where able to before or is this all gone?

IW: We would like you to play the game the way we designed and balanced it.

So not only is there not going to be any mods, there most likely will be no customization at all. If its not in the menu system, it can't be changed. And just how far does their balancing go? There will also be no ability to lean around corners because the game "isn't balanced for lean."

It was then brought up that if there is no console, what about hackers? Will there be a way to kick them? Let's see what IW has to say.

Q: Since we cannot kick people in ranked matches, how will we stop hackers who get past VAC?

IW: Our goal is to ban hackers from the game.

Good luck with that one. In other news, I've also heard rumors that IW has found a cure for cancer and is currently in negotiations with all the world's leaders to end war forever. Is there anything they can't do? Unfortunately, yes, there is.

Q: Is there a /record feature? Answer yes... please. We're trying to give you a 'chance'.

IW: No.

(As an aside, the way I hear this specific Q&A in my head makes me crack up every time I read it.) Ok, so not necessarily a dealbreaker that it doesn't support a record feature, but why would they not. It's not like it's a difficult thing to implement or that the game wasn't "balanced" for it. My opinion: perhaps they didn't want a lot of videos on youtube with 5 second pauses in the game every time someone leaves the game.

Q: Please give me a direct answer. On the PC version. Are all games hosted by players, and is there a five-second delay when host migration is in effect?

IW: yes.

So every game is hosted by a player and if that player leaves, then there will be a five second delay while the game selects a different host. Oh, and there is no way to select who will host. That's determined by the game. If you thought a high ping or low frame rates would make a game annoying, just imagine what it's going to be like every time the host rage-quits. Oh, and what about the host having an advantage because of a really good ping. No need to worry, because that will be offset by the game "having a great tolerance for latency".

But luckily, it's not all bad news. There was at least some good news for PC players.

Q: Ignoring IW.net, is the PC version a direct port of the console version?

IW: No, PC has custom stuff like mouse control, text chat in game, and graphics settings.

See? Doesn't that make you feel better? You're going to be able to use your mouse and keyboard and use text chat in game. And what's that you say? You want to use a resolution higher than 800x600? Well, the folks over at IW have heard your cries. They're going to let you adjust you graphical settings. See, they spent so much time on the PC version that they're going to let you use features that have been in every PC game since Doom. Apparently, it was balanced for that.

But there is some good news. All those reports about how it's the best selling game at Gamespot ever. Well, those are only retail sales and a lot of Gamespot stores don't even sell PC games. So how well is it doing in the digital distribution world? Direct2Drive, Impulse, and GamersGate are all refusing to sell it because it relies on Steamworks. As for Steam, it has yet to go higher than 4th and is consistently being beaten by L4D2, Borderlands, Torchlight, Dragon Age, and even Football Manager 2010.

Test drive the infection

One plug-in, many console commands.

Yep.

GT's top 10 "Guiltiest Pleaures"

Video Games | GT Countdown | Top 10 Guiltiest Pleasures

XBox 360 | Playstation 3 | Nintendo Wii

Spoilers ahead

Shack News nabbed an interview with Gearbox's Mikey Neumann, one of the troubled minds behind Borderlands. Playing deep into the game (especially if you play deep into the night) you start to get the feeling that there's something sinister at work with the weapon system: a hidden process that's thinking ... about you. It's intentional, and weird, and ultimately incomprehensible, but it's what kept me interested in the game all the way to the end.

And there's more of it, according to Mr. Neumann.

Painkiller: Resurrection sucks

I was about 15 minutes in when I realized that I wasn't enjoying it. At all. After another 20 minutes or so, I said "f**k this" - out loud - and loaded up the original. So much better.

Gamespot has a rather scathing review, but this post (entitled "This is not a Painkiller Game") on the JoWood forums really hits home. It reminded me why I loved the first game, and let me off the hook for only suffering through the first half-hour of a larger ordeal.

Bummer.

L4D2 demo impressions

From Ars, not me (although I think they're spot-on):

First, the graphics have been improved, and the more you play the more you'll appreciate the extra layer of love the visuals have received. The character models have added detail, and the new infected models are likewise impressive; you can shoot off an arm and they'll keep coming. You can take off a zombie's legs. With the machete as your melee weapon you can open up the guts of a zombie or take off its head with one swing.

The demo levels take place in the daylight, meaning you get to see much more of the world than you could in the first Left 4 Dead. This may make things a little less scary; the game actually feels more like an action movie than a horror film. The physics on the bodies has also been improved, as newly re-deadened zombies will flop and fly as you shoot or blow them up. Wait until you see what happens when you throw a pipe bomb in the demo—bodies go flying every which way with the mighty blast.

Full article here.

Battlefield: Bad Company 2 beta hoax(es)

From the BFBC2 blog:

As of today there is no official Battlefield Bad Company 2 Beta and I wanted to warn people out there of fake/hoax sites perpetrating to have a sign-up for one. We do not have any form of beta sign-ups, nor would we ever endorse such a practice or shady url to do so. Please do not let these e-tards take advantage of your enthusiasm for BFBC2 in their scam and only give them the middle-finger if anything. So, unless you read it here or from our official Twitter page it isn't real.

Why I'm not buying Modern Warfare 2

I've been on the fence about Call of Duty "version 6" for a long time. As I said in greater detail here, for all the bells and whistles that have have been tacked-on over the years, the multiplayer hasn't really evolved. Most of what Infinity Ward calls innovation seems to me to be a series of "expansion pack" offerings that have amounted to little more than bits of new flesh affixed to the same decaying bones. The one thing that has forced me to revisit the buying decision from time to time is the fact that some members of my online gaming crew are (or were) pumped to play MW2. When you have a group of people that you enjoy gaming with night after night, you should never take them for granted.

Once the dedicated server bomb dropped, I started thinking beyond the immediate and obvious consequences of MW2's various amputations. There's a good deal of subtext to the introduction of IWNET, and I think we have enough information at this point to draw a few conclusions about Activision's and Infinity Ward's vision for the future of PC gaming. The reasons I'm giving MW2 a pass are listed below, and that list will be the foundation of my broader argument.

1. The console tax - Considering the absence of (A) a proper server browser, (B) a dedicated server app, and (C) modding/mapping tools, MW2 offers much less for $60 than CoD4 offered for $50. Instead of adding functionality to the console SKU's, Infinity Ward expects PC players to pay for a net decrease in functionality, all in the name of making the various platforms "more equal."

2. Multiplayer stagnation - CoD5's multiplayer looked a lot like CoD4's. MW2's multiplayer will follow suit. Where any of those games looked different from 2004's United Offensive, the new additions were largely derived from things modders did with previous releases. Infinity Ward isn't just offering yet another retread with MW2; they're also shitting on their best creative resource. The next game in the series will suffer for it.

3. Multiplayer longevity - It's hard enough to build a community around a game when the next game is only a year away. When you're forced to run a listen server to make use of any of the (meager) match-customization options - which in turn severely limits the number of players that can join a game - community building becomes impossible. IWNET's consolized matchmaking system not only deprives clans of the opportunity to have "home" servers; it also fundamentally eliminates the potential for larger-scale organization between players within the game. That kind of system is fine for a co-op game like Left 4 Dead, where the games are all 4v4. For a game that can theoretically accommodate a much larger number of players, forcing everyone to join stock pubs via a "friends" list is a kick in the balls that few PC guys will tolerate for very long.

4. Contempt for the gamer - Infinity Ward's PR offensive has been nothing short of inept. They've touted IWNET over the traditional server browser - for the supposed benefit of the apocryphal "casual player" - hoping that no one will notice that CoD4 still has over 200,000 players that make effective use of the latter. They've marginalized all the modders, mappers and "tuners" that have invested hundreds of hours in producing original content for the (real) benefit of other players. And they've intimated that the people upset about the lack of a dedicated server are mostly cheaters, or "insular" elitists, or shills for game server providers. I don't want to hand money to an organization that seems so fit to insult my intelligence, and then openly insults the community that supported the franchise all these years.

Over the course of two or three releases (including MW2), Infinity Ward has made it abundantly clear that the consoles are its priority, and that PC development has become an afterthought (at best, and most likely an annoyance). Between piracy, hardware costs, a lower price point, and free DLC, they're just not making enough money on us. It seems to me that the IWNET strategy is part of a longer-term effort to push PC players to migrate to one console or the other, and it's not enough to simply discontinue the PC SKU. Instead, Infinity Ward is apparently trying to leverage the loyalty of the PC fanbase overall against the people that want to hold PC gaming to the higher standard that it has always enjoyed vis-a-vis the consoles. If they can convince enough players to lower their expectations of what a PC game should be, it might reduce the incentive to build a gaming rig in the first place.

It's not just about Call of Duty. The real danger is that other PC developers will follow Infinity Ward's lead, raising prices while diminishing the quality of the online multiplayer experience. I don't begrudge any game developer's desire to make money, but I do oppose this anti-PC gaming movement Infinity Ward has started. So, I'm voting with my wallet. Buying Modern Warfare 2 would be a tacit endorsement of creeping-consolization, and the ultimate cost would a hell of a lot more than $60. If I don't join the boycott, I'm helping to screw the very people that made gaming enjoyable for me, night after night, for the last five years.

And besides, spending $60 for six to eight hours of singleplayer would just be stupid.

Left 4 Dead 2 demo

It's available right now to those who pre-ordered.

(@ Steam News)