black ops II will have dedicated ranked and unranked servers. treyarch said so
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2012/06/17/black-ops-ii-getting-dedicated-pc-servers.aspx
see
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Hasn't Treyarch always brought dedicated servers?FelipeInside
Activision must hate them for making so much sense, shame on them.
[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]Hasn't Treyarch always brought dedicated servers?Bikouchu35
Activision must hate them for making so much sense, shame on them.
I personally prefer MatchMaking. But it would be nice for them to have a COMBINATION of the two.[QUOTE="Bikouchu35"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"]Hasn't Treyarch always brought dedicated servers?FelipeInside
Activision must hate them for making so much sense, shame on them.
I personally prefer MatchMaking. But it would be nice for them to have a COMBINATION of the two. Matchmaking is horrible, even on the consoles.[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="Bikouchu35"]I personally prefer MatchMaking. But it would be nice for them to have a COMBINATION of the two. Matchmaking is horrible, even on the consoles. That seems to be the general consensus. I've never had an issue with it in either MW2 or MW3. Only if I tried to play early in the morning it would put me with a US Host. I like how I can just choose my preferred game type and then wait a few seconds and it connects. But like I said, a combination of the two would be best.Activision must hate them for making so much sense, shame on them.
darksusperia
Treyarch is starting to be better than Infinity Ward at this point. They actually care about the people that made Call of Duty a success, while Infinity Ward just shows us the middle finger.
[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="Bikouchu35"]I personally prefer MatchMaking. But it would be nice for them to have a COMBINATION of the two. Matchmaking is horrible, even on the consoles. Agreed. Matchmaking broke MW2 on PC. Hell, MW2 broke MW2 in terms of versus online. I bought MW2 for the co-op and SP. Oh wait.. :PActivision must hate them for making so much sense, shame on them.
darksusperia
[QUOTE="Bikouchu35"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"]Hasn't Treyarch always brought dedicated servers?FelipeInside
Activision must hate them for making so much sense, shame on them.
I personally prefer MatchMaking. But it would be nice for them to have a COMBINATION of the two.^^ the co-op and sp campaign in MW2 was great...FelipeInsideMW 2 had by far the worst campaign in an FPS game, not even W@W was that bad and even the level design was terrible in that one.
[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]^^ the co-op and sp campaign in MW2 was great...DanielDustMW 2 had by far the worst campaign in an FPS game, not even W@W was that bad and even the level design was terrible in that one. I liked it, although the story was too convoluted and a bit all over the place. I enjoyed the SP of MW1 and MW3 better. The co-op was great fun too.
[QUOTE="DanielDust"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"]^^ the co-op and sp campaign in MW2 was great...FelipeInsideMW 2 had by far the worst campaign in an FPS game, not even W@W was that bad and even the level design was terrible in that one. I liked it, although the story was too convoluted and a bit all over the place. I enjoyed the SP of MW1 and MW3 better. The co-op was great fun too. CO-OP was good, same with MW 3 which I didn't play much, can't comment on how bad or half decent the campaign is since I'm having trouble caring enough to finish the first mission, the game is a mess, more than MW 2 that stutters randomly online, MW 3 crashed randomly and I don't care enough to google once again config "fixes", it's one of the few gaming failures I had, I can't finish a single mission for a game that doesn't last more than 6 hours and I was at my 2nd attempt a few days ago, I just can't do it. MP is decent tho, at least it doesn't stutter there, unlike MW 2.
I liked it, although the story was too convoluted and a bit all over the place. I enjoyed the SP of MW1 and MW3 better. The co-op was great fun too. CO-OP was good, same with MW 3 which I didn't play much, can't comment on how bad or half decent the campaign is since I'm having trouble caring enough to finish the first mission, the game is a mess, more than MW 2 that stutters randomly online, MW 3 crashed randomly and I don't care enough to google once again config "fixes", it's one of the few gaming failures I had, I can't finish a single mission for a game that doesn't last more than 6 hours and I was at my 2nd attempt a few days ago, I just can't do it. MP is decent tho, at least it doesn't stutter there, unlike MW 2. Weird. MW3 worked flawlessly for me all the way through. It DID crash at the start, but I fixed it by MUTING all the voice audio/chat thing and putting the audio on Stereo. It has some really cool action "Michael Bay" scenes.[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="DanielDust"] MW 2 had by far the worst campaign in an FPS game, not even W@W was that bad and even the level design was terrible in that one.DanielDust
I just can't stand the game anymore, the respawning forced enemies, etc, IW is terrible at it, TA also failed hard with W@W, but they learned from it, Black Ops was the smoothest CoD yet, gameplay was mostly similar to 4 so that was great too, but best of all, enemies appeared from "natural" places, they seemed like they were part of the game, if they made them jump into your face at least the game was flowing as fast as the AI was introduced, not the case with MW 3, it's disgustingly bad, that's why I can't even finish the first mission, there's random AI appearing from everywhere AI that, unlike BO 1, doesn't get killed and you move forward, like before you have to kill horsed if you don't advance to a simple checkpoint when they magically disappear without a trace.
BO was like "f yeah, what do I blow up next, give me more, die", MW 3's first mission is like "...what the f....dude slow down, what's happening, what am I doing here, why are you forcing me to go there, stop pushing me, don't rush, why are those guys here, didn't I already kill enough, I don't want to kill more over there, why is this happening...".
About the bugs, they're extremely common, the freezes and crashes I had, that's why some guys made special configs to alter some shading parameters and lighting, but I'll never bother to search for them, IW needs to fix it on their own, they also need to friggin implement the wonderful "shader warming" feature that was implemented in the engine since BO, it fixes a lot of its problems, but you can't activate it from the game, just configs.
[QUOTE="darksusperia"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"] I personally prefer MatchMaking. But it would be nice for them to have a COMBINATION of the two.FelipeInsideMatchmaking is horrible, even on the consoles. That seems to be the general consensus. I've never had an issue with it in either MW2 or MW3. Only if I tried to play early in the morning it would put me with a US Host. I like how I can just choose my preferred game type and then wait a few seconds and it connects. But like I said, a combination of the two would be best.yeah matchmaking rocks here is footage http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyn-DqFHbWQ
this was on the free weeeknd
[QUOTE="darksusperia"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"] I personally prefer MatchMaking. But it would be nice for them to have a COMBINATION of the two.FelipeInsideMatchmaking is horrible, even on the consoles. That seems to be the general consensus. I've never had an issue with it in either MW2 or MW3. Only if I tried to play early in the morning it would put me with a US Host. I like how I can just choose my preferred game type and then wait a few seconds and it connects. But like I said, a combination of the two would be best. In short bursts matchmaking is good, but it doesn't really give me much options and control over matches I want and if I wanted that I would game on a console.:P
Black Ops was the smoothest CoD yet,
DanielDust
You meant gameplay right?
Cause technically....OMG it was bad.
That seems to be the general consensus. I've never had an issue with it in either MW2 or MW3. Only if I tried to play early in the morning it would put me with a US Host. I like how I can just choose my preferred game type and then wait a few seconds and it connects. But like I said, a combination of the two would be best.yeah matchmaking rocks here is footage http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyn-DqFHbWQ[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="darksusperia"] Matchmaking is horrible, even on the consoles.JigglyWiggly_
this was on the free weeeknd
Blah Blah Blah, that's all I hear from people complaining about MM. For me it's worked perfectly 90% of the time, and it's easier than Dedicated Servers to find what you are looking for quickly. Saying that, it does have it's bad side, like Hosts, no admins, no control over map options etc. That's why I said (if you had read my post correctly), that a COMBINATION (key word here: COMBINATION) of the two would be great.[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]yeah matchmaking rocks here is footage http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyn-DqFHbWQ[QUOTE="FelipeInside"] That seems to be the general consensus. I've never had an issue with it in either MW2 or MW3. Only if I tried to play early in the morning it would put me with a US Host. I like how I can just choose my preferred game type and then wait a few seconds and it connects. But like I said, a combination of the two would be best.FelipeInside
this was on the free weeeknd
Blah Blah Blah, that's all I hear from people complaining about MM. For me it's worked perfectly 90% of the time, and it's easier than Dedicated Servers to find what you are looking for quickly. Saying that, it does have it's bad side, like Hosts, no admins, no control over map options etc. That's why I said (if you had read my post correctly), that a COMBINATION (key word here: COMBINATION) of the two would be great. lol ur so wrong first of all no admins on quake live servers for instance second LAG LAG LAG LA GLAG i own mw2 (i am dissapointed in myself for buying it) and half the games were so laggy and it never picked me as host when I have the best Internet usually.[QUOTE="DanielDust"]
Black Ops was the smoothest CoD yet,
FelipeInside
You meant gameplay right?
Cause technically....OMG it was bad.
[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]
[QUOTE="DanielDust"]
Black Ops was the smoothest CoD yet,
DanielDust
You meant gameplay right?
Cause technically....OMG it was bad.
[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]
[QUOTE="DanielDust"]
Black Ops was the smoothest CoD yet,
DanielDust
You meant gameplay right?
Cause technically....OMG it was bad.
[QUOTE="DanielDust"]Everything, I got it about 4 months after release, everything worked great, just like CoDs used to be ever since, as somebody previously said IW started saying "f you, we made CoD, we know how to make games, get the $hit we make because it's the bomb, cause we say it is, we know better than you". Have to disagree on that one. Black Ops was the FIRST MMO to stutter, crash and have framerate problems at launch. BOTH SP and MP. I wasn't the only one, I remember these forums went crazy with people complaining about all those issues. 9 out of 10 couldn't run it properly. Hats off to IW though cause they fixed it in the first 2-3 weeks. Now it runs fine. EDIT: I understand why it was smooth for you, you got it 4 months later. I remember that, lol, it was SO bad, god good this game would not stop crashing and it ran like s***.XD[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]
You meant gameplay right?
Cause technically....OMG it was bad.FelipeInside
Cool and all, but IW never fixed anything MW 2 runs the same as it did at launch, bad, stuttering from time to time in an online FPS, constantly not just occasionally, is a terrible "feature" and MW 3 received patches that did absolutely nothing for bugs, glitches and crashes, they're the Bethesda of FPSs(sorry, I forgot DICE, they're absolutely retarded when it comes to support, well, IW's the worst after them).
That seems to be the general consensus. I've never had an issue with it in either MW2 or MW3. Only if I tried to play early in the morning it would put me with a US Host. I like how I can just choose my preferred game type and then wait a few seconds and it connects. But like I said, a combination of the two would be best.yeah matchmaking rocks here is footage http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyn-DqFHbWQ[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="darksusperia"] Matchmaking is horrible, even on the consoles.JigglyWiggly_
this was on the free weeeknd
I had the same trouble on the free weekend. Complete garbage.
Black Ops did as well. Treyarch knows how it is.
Apparently, people who've played Black Ops 2 already said it's quite awesome. It's much more focused on competition. I guess we'll see. I really enjoyed Black Ops. The maps were actually good. To bad the gun selection was your typical CoD crap where all but 2-3 weapons are useless.
[QUOTE="Bikouchu35"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"]Hasn't Treyarch always brought dedicated servers?FelipeInside
Activision must hate them for making so much sense, shame on them.
I personally prefer MatchMaking. But it would be nice for them to have a COMBINATION of the two. BF3 has match making which connects you to dedicated servers and of course a server browser with extensive filter settings plus you have the recently released Close Quarters infantry-only shoebox maps minus the three tier perk system and killstreaks, it's almost like it's calling you Felipe :P I don't have a problem with default COD game modes(i.e non-barebones) but with Treyarch especially the problem the first time around is that they threw all the weapons in a blender so they feel and function the same(at least within the same weapon class) which ruined what MWF2 has done easily better than any game in recent history and lead MWF3 to follow the same trend and it doesn't help that it seems like we may not be seeing stopping power(or a second-tier perk promoting "run and gun") to counter balance whatever new over-used second-tier omega-camper-pro perk they'll come up with this time. Treyarch games have input lag, blenderize weapons, fail to promote a variety in loadouts, and level design by campers for campers, I don't see why I would trust them to make a game when the games they've already made seem like polar opposites of what I thought made MWF2 the best MP experience in the franchise(and no as I said before dediservs make little difference for people living in NYC, a city with more than 27000 people per square mile).Congrats to Treyarch for turning the COD franchise(campers are happy it's not like MWF2 but I'm not sure if I'd like to play with these guys) into what it is, they're in the spotlight now, they can implement the new ultra-camper-pro perks that will of course be mirrored by Sledgehammer's iterations of COD, I'm not even one of those prudes that whine over kill streaks or perks or what have you rather my problem is with the new spawn system used in MWF3 which doesn't have organized lane pushing, and the way Treyarch handles weapons, perks, and level design clearly screams "by campers for campers". That being said I'll still pre-order Camper Ops 2 but that's merely because I'll probably find $60 of value just within the SP(plus the SP typically is discussed for a few weeks on SB but that's specific to people on SB forums) and possibly I'll play the COOP as well if they fixed the meat train issue that seems to be prevalent in games like L4D2 and Killing Floor.
Yeah, at release you needed something like a NASA super computer to play COD 7 at more than 1 frame per second :lol:As long as it isn't broken technically like Black Ops one was on PC. Performance on that game was lousy, even on lowest settings. Was in no way, shape, or form, the "smoothest COD yet.":lol:
Lach0121
I thought this was expected, as Black Ops was the same way. But Blops had so many other issues that I don't plan on getting this one. The only thing I REALLY liked about the game was the weapon sounds. :)
[QUOTE="Lach0121"]Yeah, at release you needed something like a NASA super computer to play COD 7 at more than 1 frame per second :lol:As long as it isn't broken technically like Black Ops one was on PC. Performance on that game was lousy, even on lowest settings. Was in no way, shape, or form, the "smoothest COD yet.":lol:
Zubinen
Even several months after release it was still lousy, though not quite as bad. Still, just about every other COD game I played was smoother than Black Ops. (even several months after it launched)
[QUOTE="DanielDust"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"]^^ the co-op and sp campaign in MW2 was great...FelipeInsideMW 2 had by far the worst campaign in an FPS game, not even W@W was that bad and even the level design was terrible in that one. I liked it, although the story was too convoluted and a bit all over the place. I enjoyed the SP of MW1 and MW3 better. The co-op was great fun too. MW2 had so many plot holes. It's like they wrote the story in an hour and just threw it into the game.
[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="Bikouchu35"]I personally prefer MatchMaking. But it would be nice for them to have a COMBINATION of the two. BF3 has match making which connects you to dedicated servers and of course a server browser with extensive filter settings plus you have the recently released Close Quarters infantry-only shoebox maps minus the three tier perk system and killstreaks, it's almost like it's calling you FelipeActivision must hate them for making so much sense, shame on them.
Zubinen
The problem is that it doesn't work properly. :(
Saying that, I will probably pick up Close Quarters when it launches.
BF3 has match making which connects you to dedicated servers and of course a server browser with extensive filter settings plus you have the recently released Close Quarters infantry-only shoebox maps minus the three tier perk system and killstreaks, it's almost like it's calling you Felipe[QUOTE="Zubinen"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"] I personally prefer MatchMaking. But it would be nice for them to have a COMBINATION of the two.FelipeInside
The problem is that it doesn't work properly. :(
Saying that, I will probably pick up Close Quarters when it launches.
I thought it already had?BF3 has match making which connects you to dedicated servers and of course a server browser with extensive filter settings plus you have the recently released Close Quarters infantry-only shoebox maps minus the three tier perk system and killstreaks, it's almost like it's calling you Felipe[QUOTE="Zubinen"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"] I personally prefer MatchMaking. But it would be nice for them to have a COMBINATION of the two.FelipeInside
The problem is that it doesn't work properly. :(
Saying that, I will probably pick up Close Quarters when it launches.
Close Quarters is already out.I was for dedicated servers as much as the next guy, but say what you will about MW2, it was easy to just jump into a game with my friends and have a *good* time (not factoring in the frustrations of COD gameplay itself). Black Ops dedicated servers weren't much a step up, and I actually got banned from a hardcore-mode server after getting a sweet kill streak.
[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]
[QUOTE="Zubinen"] BF3 has match making which connects you to dedicated servers and of course a server browser with extensive filter settings plus you have the recently released Close Quarters infantry-only shoebox maps minus the three tier perk system and killstreaks, it's almost like it's calling you Felipe
Toxic-Seahorse
The problem is that it doesn't work properly. :(
Saying that, I will probably pick up Close Quarters when it launches.
Close Quarters is already out. Isn't it out for Premium Users only? And the rest get it on June 26th ???[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"]Close Quarters is already out. Isn't it out for Premium Users only? And the rest get it on June 26th ??? Maybe. I didn't really look into it. I just know some GS users were talking about playing it and posting screenshots in the screenshot thread.[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]
The problem is that it doesn't work properly. :(
Saying that, I will probably pick up Close Quarters when it launches.
FelipeInside
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment