Top
90°

Dedicated servers "aren't the final answer" to multiplayer bugs, says Call of Duty: Ghosts producer

OXM UK: "Dedicated servers for multiplayer games are, according to some residents of the internet, a universal panacea for iffy multiplayer performance - but just how much of that claim is grounded in fact? Are there scenarios in which player hosting actually delivers better results? We had a chance to chat with Infinity Ward's executive producer Mark Rubin about it at Gamescom in August."

GryestOfBluSkies3626d ago

and if theres anyone who knows about bugs, its someone who works on cod

CrossingEden3626d ago

As if COD is buggy. A consistent 60fps and tight controls and gameplay. Bugs are not one of cod's problems.

GryestOfBluSkies3626d ago

meanwhile, back in reality....

call of duty is one of the most bugged, glitched and hacked games of all time

Ron_Danger3626d ago

I guess when all you play is CoD, you don't notice how buggy it is since you don't have other games to use as a reference.

Just wondering if you've ever played in a room where someone is using unlimited care packages or flying in an invincible helicopter. Or unloaded a clip into someone only to have them turn around and knife you.

The reason people can do that is because they are exploiting bugs in the games code.

CrossingEden3626d ago

@Ron, assuming that I only play cod makes your entire point invalid.

Ron_Danger3626d ago

@crossing

You'll never believe what just happened. The CEO of Activision just held a press conference to talk about the past, present, and future of the CoD franchise and his main talking point was how all of the bugs and glitches suddenly vanished from all of the programming code. When asked why, he stated "it suddenly happened when an N4G user by the name of Ron_Danger assumed that another user only played Call of Duty."

I guess you were right all along...

Statix3626d ago (Edited 3626d ago )

The problem with COD's latest iterations (MW3 and Black Ops 2) is the horrific lag compensation algorithms being employed. These flawed lag comp mechanisms are meant to smooth out gameplay for laggy players or people with poor internet, but at the cost of gameplay responsiveness. Because of this, online COD has been mostly about connection and lag advantage for the past couple years, rather than skill, and that's sad.

When you get rewarded for having high ping or a laggy connection to the server (such as a US server or host being invaded by Mexicans, Russians, Germans, Canadians, etc.), it just ruins the experience for everyone, due to the way the piss-poor lag comp is implemented.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3626d ago
Pancit_Canton3626d ago

Powah of the all mighty cloud is the answer. /s

You what they say. You can't polish turd.

andron3626d ago

Well Cod's makers should really have been able to secure their games much better by now. Having people be able to ruin others game by hacking lobbies is just not acceptable...

FarCryLover1823626d ago

Having dedicated servers will fix that inherent lag that I hear about in COD games.

However, I don't think Activision are implementing dedis out of the good of their heart. I think they are doing this in order to better control their online games. Every COD game still has their servers up and running and you can play COD2 right now if you wanted to online.

I feel like Activision will remove the servers after a few years and then allocate the resources to future COD titles. I might be wrong, but now they have an excuse to take COD titles offline thus ensuring that the COD players are forced to buy their next game.

Rubberlegs3626d ago

Dedicated severs won't fix anything if they don't improve the netcode. Black Ops 2 on the PC has dedicated servers and it honestly isn't any better. You still get lag and bs killcams just like the console version.
It can be even worse on the PC because it uses lag comp. It tries to even everyone out based on their speeds but doesn't exactly work that well.

hollabox3626d ago

I would have to say anything John Carmack has been involved with as of late. Rage, Doom 4, and Quake all mediocre garbage that Mr. Wizard Carmack talked a good game about but failed to live up to expectation. When is a game done when its done but yet not done?

GodGinrai3626d ago

Doom 4 aint even out yet! Rage was ok..I thought the graphics were awesome. Gameplay was nothing special though. Quake was awesome back in the day. And it was a technical milestone in 3d graphics in games. but you are correct that Quake 4 and Rage did not live up to expectations..but they were not bad games.

hollabox3626d ago (Edited 3626d ago )

My bad Doom 3, on my work PC. Rage was ok but had soo many technical problems on the PC. Had to make config files to get the game to run properly. A patch comes out and graphical corruption, crash to desktop app not responding crap, after awhile I just gave up and uninstalled Rage 5 hrs in. Doom 3 felt generic as heck with monsters in closets scare tactics. The last two quake games felt like Doom 3 very generic late 90's shooters. Wolfenstein was ok, I think Raven Soft made that one, but besides Wolfenstein I have not liked a John Carmack game since Quake 3 but yet I'm a sucka and buy most of ID Soft games just to be disappointed.

Show all comments (20)