Oh no it might force "competetive gamers" to actually play the ****ing game and not make it Quake 3 with ****ing machine guns.
Oh no it might force "competetive gamers" to actually play the ****ing game and not make it Quake 3 with ****ing machine guns.
wat ever the hell that means
Please, enlighten me on the similarities between CoD4 Promod and Quake 3. I've played both, so I'd be happy to refute your claims.
So I just read about this and I'm appalled. Is Activision going to force all of their brands to Battle.net systems? If so, I'll avoid everything coming out of Activision (not that they've been making stellar games lately anyway...).
Whether or not this will make them more money doesn't matter. It is a power grab. Like Blizzard, they want ultimate, final control of the product that is played online. Blizzard is doing exactly the same thing with Starcraft 2. They do this with careless disregard for the needs of the consumers who pay their salaries, and it is utterly wrong.
I really don't see what makes this system necessary? What was the problem with CoD4, CoD2, CoD that made them think, "Hey, we should make a central server system for the PC version, too!" How many PC gamers CARE about matchmaking? I have a hunch that it's about one tenth of one percent.
I think this is appropriate:
[screenshot]http://i35.tinypic.com/qqphtg.jpg[/screenshot]
Basically, I hate so-called "competitive" gamers that love these idiotic mods that boil the game down to using a specific weapon and specific perks. That's not playing Call of Duty 4 competitively, that's taking out everything you don't like because it makes the game more than just pointing your gun and shooting through walls. It was the same idea with the UT2004 "pro" mods with brightskins and whatever, it took the game and made it simpler and I don't see what is so cool about that. The thing that irritates me so much about it is then those mods become widespread because everyone wants to be seen as pro, and most servers are run by competitive clans.
This is serious.