307
rate

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 needs to fix multiplayer issues

April 04, 2009 in Blog comments 21

The Call of Duty games offer great multiplayer action up until the point when some twit you just killed for the fourth time decides to pull the plug and they just so happen to be the host. This article looks at some ideas Infinity Ward can borrow from the business world to fix session-ending issues due to connectivity or a player leaving the game session.

herdon via examiner.com »
Favourite this article Add source
| More
Report!

Comments

Register as a member to subscribe comments.
  • 4
    dmf_dynasty Apr 4, 09
    Call of Duty 2 was modern warfare? I had no idea.
  • 1
    Shattered Apr 4, 09
    There are a number of things they need to add or fix. I haven't looked at the article yet, but this is what needs to happen in my opinion;

    1) In-game Music Support for Online Play Only like KZ2
    2) Dedicated Servers
    3) Better Clan Support
    4) Upgrades Leaderboards (Weapon stats, melee stats, etc)

    If all those happen then MW2 is sure to be GotY again, and it will please ALL of the game's players.
    • 1
      Darknet Apr 4, 09
      I actually listen to my own music for the 360.
      • 1
        Shattered Apr 4, 09
        Yeah, well because of Microsoft, Sony can't just have it play from the HDD whenever. All because M$ had to patent the bloody way they did it 26 times over.
    • 0
      Seeker X Apr 5, 09
      The "clan system" was definitely a joke. "Here, give yourself a tag. YAY! you're now in a clan", of course it didn't really stop anyone from copy/pasting your tag (just to piss the *bleep* outta you), so much for exclusivity. Sad part is that a lot of games do it just like that.
      • 0
        Storm Apr 5, 09
        Haha, yeah that's been happening in many games over the years. More clan suppor would be great, and so long as they get rid of that 'host power', I'll be happy.
  • 0
    redneonfish Apr 4, 09
    Call of Duty? I thought it was just Modern Warfare now, excuse me being pedantic
    • 0
      Shattered Apr 4, 09
      Oh it is just Modern Warfare 2 only now, but it seems some people still haven't learned that yet
  • 0
    Fury Apr 4, 09
    They need to make a more interesting ranking system IMO. The whole prestige thing was pretty stupid, honestly. I never saw the point in going prestige, just so you could lose all your weapons and gain a new symbol thing. It doesn't prove that you're any better, just that you play more. I'm probably the only one thinks that, though.

    Maybe if they made it so you could actually lose EXP somehow, it would be more interesting. Or just revamp the system altogether.
    • 0
      redneonfish Apr 4, 09
      Prestige is supposed to bring the fun back into the game. So you can reunlock stuff, kinda like starting again on Pokemon and games like that.

      Although, I do agree, it's pretty pointless.
      • 0
        Fury Apr 4, 09
        Yeah but restarting Pokemon gives that nostalgic feeling. Losing all your weapons doesn't... You still have what you had before, just less of it. In a game like Pokemon, you can't replay something without starting over. In CoD4, you can do whatever the hell you want if you just stay at level 55.

        They were probably trying to create a system that was endlessly addicting, but they really just ended up making completely pointless (like you said) mode you unlock after going through the original ranking system.
    • 0
      Slumpy monkey Apr 4, 09
      Losing xp would ruin the game.

      If you had a lot of games with crappy team mates you would lose your weapons and it would suck. In the end making people loose xp would just piss people off and take the fun out of the game. Everyone would become over competitive, you know like 12 year olds who shout at everyone for losing even though a majority of the time at the bottom of the score table.
      • 0
        Fury Apr 4, 09
        I honestly wouldn't mind losing weapons after losing a game, if it makes the game feel more competitive. I mean, the whole point of a ranking system is to compare your own skills to others, but the CoD4 one didn't really do that.

        Besides, you lost your weapons in the old system for going up. Losing them for going down can't be that bad when compared to that, can it? Most people seemed to do just fine with lower-ranked weapons on CoD4 every time they went prestige. If you want better weapons, you should have to really work for it, not just play the game more. Just makes more sense that way.
        • 0
          Slumpy monkey Apr 5, 09
          Noo because in cod4 you had the choice of losing your weapons. And seeing as there is no ranked/unranked game types it forces the player to play ranked games and lose their xp.

          So they would implement a ranked unranked feature. So you would have people who have all the guns etc, then you would have people who never play ranked and still have the stuff you start with. Basically it would screw up online tbh.
        • 0
          Fury Apr 6, 09
          I guess some people would be pissed if they lost their weapons, but I honestly think it would make it more interesting... I understand what you're saying about having the choice to lose them or not in CoD4, but I still think it's more exciting this way. I was pretty disappointed in CoD4 when I had reached 55 fairly quickly, and the only way to advance was to lose everything. It basically made me lose interest in the game altogether.

          I don't know about everyone else, but the multiplayer would be 10x more exciting if you actually had to do consistently well in the game in order to gain weapons, rather than just play it more. Some people might be able to shoot straight up through the ranks to get all the weapons, but for everyone else, it would require you to actually get better.

          The unranked games idea you have is pretty good, though. I don't see the problem with some people having all the weapons and some people not having anything. It was the same way with CoD4, wasn't it? Besides, most people complained about the M16 being the most overpowered weapon, even though you got it first. The reason why you got it first was probably to balance everything out. I'm sure they would do the same thing here. Even if they didn't, none of the weapons really have huge advantages over each other anyways.
  • 0
    Drogo Baggins Apr 5, 09
    For me, this was the only problem with COD4: Modern Warfare.

    I really, really enjoyed the multi-player, until the host bailed out and ended the game. Other than that, it was absolutely perfect for me.
  • 0
    Dio Apr 5, 09
    Agreed.

    Going 49-6 on Hardcore Headquarters and having the connection interrupted was very frustrating.
  • 0
    Metallica Apr 5, 09
    The server should automatically find another suitable host rather than it ending, especially if you were on Shipment and had abot 100 or more kills!!

This news story is archived and is closed to comments now.