MW2: What's the Compromise?

[woowoo]

Having

been in the software business for a while I recommend we take a two fold approach:
1. Boycott the game - the only way to get their attention is to hit them in the wallet. This is the teeth behind any message we focus on.

2. Speak with one voice - the angry tirades get quickly ignored by decision makers, but if everyone in the community spoke with a single but simple message it would break through the static. The

CoD

2 blackout was

successful

because it had a single yet simple message.

The question becomes what should the "single yet simple" message be?

Dedicated Servers? This probably should be the message. However, I don't think we will be

successful

. It is doubtful to me that IW will consider changing their stance. They likely view this as a way to "fix" the PC space for them and if it doesn't work - oh well - they were probably going to drop it anyway.

Or ............

IW-Net As We Want It? IW might be willing to compromise with us and built in some specific features that get some, but not all, of what we need. If you boil it down, some of those most important features are:
* Having a sizable place to congregate with people of like mind (e.g. community or clan members) that can be called your own
* Configure the settings for your groups particular tastes (e.g. HC, competitive, etc.)
* Being able to remove people who are trouble makers
There are a few others. Typically I would say custom maps / mods but I feel in this

environment

those are a lost cause.

The real question I have - does anyone care enough about trying to find a compromise or is it an all or nothing game? I ask because all or nothing will result in nothing.

Thoughts?

[d2sjones]

There is no compromise!

Looking at the numbers fron PsB aprox 2million CoD4 players unique GUIDs registered through streaming servers. Cant tell how many at PBBans but between them lets make it a round 2million users.

If all 2m of them refuse POINT BLANK to buy the game in its current guise at an average retail of $60 that is $120,000,000 that AV/IW loses in revenues that they MUST have been banking on.

I care not how many console kiddies buy the game and are ecstatic with it NO company can afford to lose a revenue stream that large particularly in current trading climate.

Throw in the loss of sales for PC maker and component suppliers for all those that would have upgraded their rigs for the new game. What do Nvidea think of the loss of revenues? How many Mobo makers will lose sales? Petitions are fine and an out pouring of frustration but they will not affect those in AV/IW who make the dsecisions.

But if we vote with our pockets and we get some manufactures and large GSPs onside with us we MAY stand a chance of getting them to think again.

The only way to fight this IMHO is to refuse to buy the game ... ever ... period ... unless or until we get dedi servers and mod tools and preferably PB rather than VAC but thats just my preference, and to get the hardware industry that we support on our side.

[Pendragon]

I think it's real simple, games with dedi-server support get played online by large numbers. Games that don't have dedi-server software don't get played online by large numbers.

The issue with this game is that the lack of dedi server is not a mistake it's deliberate. It's an attempt to change the way we play. I would hate to think that this move is considered a comerial sucsess. If it is then it's something we can expect to see with other PC games. That would be the end of PC gaming as we know it.

[woowoo]

Originally Posted by Pendragon

The issue with this game is that the lack of dedi server is not a mistake it's deliberate. It's an attempt to change the way we play. I would hate to think that this move is considered a comerial sucsess.

An example of the math that IW is doing - not saying its right and I'm guessing at the numbers but I'm trying to show their perspective:

8 M bought CoD4 x $40 = $320M
Notice that another 3 M pirated game but no revenue

8M + 3M = 11M buyers
Figure third will be mad about dedicated servers and not buy
7.3 M buy at $50 = $365 M
They release 3 map packs and on average sell them to third of the players
2.4 M buy at $10 = $24 M

Total CoD4 PC Revenue of $320 M
Total CoD6 PC Revenue of $389 M
or an increase of $69 M

So they figure they CAN piss us off and still make more money. I agree its deliberate and from their perspective - once they change to this model then they can begin growing their PC business again. So the question is - can we get enough people to NOT buy the game to change the math - knowing they will lose some sales?

Our other options are find a compromise or find another game.

[d2sjones]

Originally Posted by woowoo

An example of the math that IW is doing - not saying its right and I'm guessing at the numbers but I'm trying to show their perspective:

8 M bought CoD4 x $40 = $320M
Notice that another 3 M pirated game but no revenue

8M + 3M = 11M buyers
Figure third will be mad about dedicated servers and not buy
7.3 M buy at $50 = $365 M
They release 3 map packs and on average sell them to third of the players
2.4 M buy at $10 = $24 M

Total CoD4 PC Revenue of $320 M
Total CoD6 PC Revenue of $389 M
or an increase of $69 M

So they figure they CAN piss us off and still make more money. I agree its deliberate and from their perspective - once they change to this model then they can begin growing their PC business again. So the question is - can we get enough people to NOT buy the game to change the math - knowing they will lose some sales?

Our other options are find a compromise or find another game.

Bit of an error in your math there Woo2 you assume that the 3m that pirated the game last time will buy it this time in your revenue calcs.

That will not happen.

I recon you would be better advised to say 1/3rd will buy the game and the other 2/3rds will pirate the game for the 2 - 3 hours of SP run and gun console style mayhem.

Ther only thing that will not happen this time round is that you will not get the thousands of cracked servers with the tens of thousands of cheapskates playing online that did not buy the game. I feel no remores losing those and it still peeves me when i look at all the tracking sites and see all those cracked servers at the top of the lists.

[woowoo]

Oh I agree that this approach will not cause the pirates to suddenly start buying the game. What I am saying is that I believe that IW thinks it will get some of them to buy.

I believe their math doesn't add up - but based on IW's behavior this is the only logical conclusion that I see.

Because why would you disrupt the entire PC community unless you thought you could make more money?

[bacon]

If the MP sucks there is no reason at all to buy it. A cracked version will most likely play the sp just fine, so this move is gonna increase piracy not reduce it. This is their new business model, and I guess this is what they came up with to add value to their product.

[woowoo]

So if this thing is P2P using IW-Net as the match maker - in the PC world doesn't that open it up to even more hacking? Isn't every PC then a part of the "server"?

[Tufelhunden]

Personally I am a firm believer in all or nothing. If they give us nothing then fine. I am sure there are other companies which would love to earn my money. If not then it's independent games for me. FPS or otherwise. I refuse to pay someone that doesn't want my business or understands what the FPS games and players are about.

[YewNork]

Originally Posted by woowoo

....

The real question I have - does anyone care enough about trying to find a compromise or is it an all or nothing game? I ask because all or nothing will result in nothing.

Thoughts?

i would be willing to compromise assuming they came forth and say "we will add these features in the future" then i would CONSIDER buying it. we cant assume they will ever add dedicated server ability unless they say it themselves that it is 100% coming.

even if IWNET fails completely...

They will NEVER admit any of their mistakes. they truely beleive IWNET is the way of the future and if it doesn't work out they will blame us. They will say "you werent willing to compromise to the better system and its your own fault the game was a failure".

As far as i can tell you cannot have IWNET working WITH our OWN dedicated games. it just doesnt seem like they would mesh. with that being said they wont abandon IWNET. also they wont promote something (dedicated servers) that goes against their new model(listen servers + IWNET). so if this^ is true we can expect to never have dedicated servers....
UNLESS
they admit they were wrong.
how often do companies do admit their mistakes