http://www.gamespot.com/news/6239085.html

Perhaps if UBI listend to the community, interacted with them, and supported products after release they wouldn't be going down the toilet.

Any UBI people want to talk about upcoming Rainbow Six titles with us before the game options are set in stone?

I didn't think so.

The main guys associated with UBISoft probably already received all their compensation and are ready to move on to another business or organization.

The company's ongoing performance is irrelevant to them.

It's one of the only logical but common explanations when it comes to the incredibly poor handling of their customer service.

Well Karma certainly is a EDIT isn't it UBIsoft?

This is what happens when you EDIT on your customers year after year. Maybe your next game can be based on your experiences at the unemployment office.

Lets not bypass the language filter please

This message has been edited. Last edited by: ms-kleaneasy,

quote:

Originally posted by RLCSeMPeRFi:
This is what happens when you ***EDIT*** on your customers year after year. Maybe your next game can be based on your experiences at the unemployment office.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: BTOG46,

quote:

Originally posted by RLCSeMPeRFi:
Well Karma certainly is a ***EDIT*** isn't it UBIsoft?

This is what happens when you ***EDIT*** on your customers year after year. Maybe your next game can be based on your experiences at the unemployment office.

At least at the unemployment office, they would be required to be involved in a little 2 way communication.

Maybe they can learn something from it!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: BTOG46,

Epic has a way of treating the community decently. They just released a free Unreal 3 Developer's Kit to the community that allows gamers to create games for sale. Microsoft has allowed gamers the same with payware mods for Flight Simulator for quite some time.

Ubi needs to wake up and smell the coffee and join the real world. With other companies our preforming them in sales, even in a down time, tells one that what they are selling isn't worth the money they are asking. When first time posters on the Ubi forum talk about a game not being as good as the first one and then stating in the same breath that they will not buy another Ubi game, someone really needs a swift kick in the pants out the door.

Unfortunately, Ubisoft seems to be more interested in Quantity than they are in Quality.

Push the next unfinished, broken title out the door as quickly as possible and hope for lots of quick sales before gamers find out how bad it is.

I personally believe this practice is catching up with Ubisoft and it appears the last sales report bears out this fact.

But. I don't think Ubisoft is listening to their gamer base and I seriously doubt anything will change.

Quality products along with Quality Service, Support, and Communication are very important elements in any successful business.

Modern Warfare 2 is turning out to be one of the biggest Multiplayer failures of all time for the PC.

It doesn't matter though because they smashed their quotas on the console market and are laughing all the way to the bank because of it.


DICE (an EA Games developer) is the one you want to support going forward.

They "get" the PC Gamer market and are willing to stand behind us and support it.


There is plenty of money to be made from PC Gamers because a PC they can do things a crappy $299 console can only dream of......

However it does require developers to do a little more work.

Most PC Gamers refused to accept a ****ty console port.

quote:

Originally posted by TheNinjaboy:
Modern Warfare 2 is turning out to be one of the biggest Multiplayer failures of all time for the PC.

OFP2R hands down. MW2 will do just fine, considering they put more money into developing the PC side of things.

I agree and disagree at the same time with how IW has dealt with no dedi's with MW2. I have not yet got the game but for a multi gaming clan like SCE, having 3-5 dedicated servers for a year can prove to be quite costly. Always hunting down donations can be a task every month to make the bills*. **** I have enough bills as it is.

If you really break down IW.net and having a service for free versus having 5 dedicated servers for a year at 50 dollars a server equals $3,000 a year. Ouch. Reality steps in quick for Dedicated servers.

I like the fact that COD has gone 9v9 and not 100-100 lol. Brings Raven Shield to mind. Will stop the nade slaughter in the first 5 seconds of the round.

The downside of things is that there are alot of 1 game clans/groups out there. COD being a big PC community and will definitely miss the dedicated servers/ mods.

MW2 will do "ok" on the PC side.

MW3 will not.


PC Gamers are slowly becoming unwilling to comprise for poor development and crappy workmanship.


Players are tired of getting burnt by companies like Codemasters and UBI-Soft.

While I agree with you about the the 100vs100 I disagree with you on all the other points especially the dedicated server portion.

If a dedicated server isn't something that someone can afford or wishes to maintain then they could still go with a listen server where they could host/play.


There will always be dedicated servers up for a good MP PC game if the developer allows it.

I for one don't want to comprise on quality and I would rather play on someone else's dedicated server then a horrible listen server hosted on a 768k upload residential cable modem.


Right now MW2's failure can be summed up best like this:

Extremely short single player (5 hours)

-Joining online servers is a joke, you're forced to enter a random server on a random map with random people. It feels like I'm playing the Xbox 360 with a mouse and keyboard.

-The servers you're forced to join doesn't always have the best ping.

-Steam is required, and it's permanently installed on your steam account. You can't sell the game later...

-Gigantic maps with only 8 vs 8 or 8 person free for all. Most people camp while others run around aimlessly before getting shot.

-Poor performance on high end hardware.

-No dedicated servers
-No Leaning
-No Modding
-9v9 capped servers (even though I agree with you it should still be an OPTION)
-It costs 10 dollars more than every other PC game
-No kicking people out of started matches
If the host leaves, there is a five second delay until a random person is chosen
No going into the console to tweak settings
Host gets a ping advantage


There is no reason to keep playing after the single player is completed.

I agree!
Multiplayer is what keeps a game alive.
With no dedicated servers, a game gets old real fast and there is nothing more to look forward to.

Watch Dragon Rising going down the drain, and I think MW2 will die a little slower death due to the popularity of the series.

I've bought only 1 Game this year, even though i do spend a lot of time playing games. I bought RaceON by Simbin. I already have Race07, STCC and GTR Evo addons for it. Fortunately Racing games dont suffer much for being associated with consoles. Apart from some of the engines that were designed for console and the steering and car physics are naff, like in GRID. RaceON dont have that problem as its a game engine built for PC and ported to console.

All FPS are built for consoles except ARMA, i toyed with getting CoD MW2 but i hear its not even as good as MW1 in multiplayer so i didnt get it and im glad theres good people around like Ninjaboy above giving a proper feature review rather than a bunch of console playing airheads shouting 'awesome man!', well, MW1 been uninstalled from my PC a long time ago. Only games im waiting on are SoW:BoB, from the makers of IL2, which originally was an UBISOFT flight sim, but 1C decided to break their ties with UBI. This is a PC only flight sim. And i like Egosoft X3:Terran Conflict, the support from Egosoft is amazing and console gamers could only dream of a space sim like this. Ha. Oh and i still play LockOn, and Supreme Commander, but SupCom is something i cant play non stop. RTS always get boring for me, but SupCom i find is the only one that keeps me loading it up from time to time for a quick blast. Due to the fact its huge with so many big maps and lots of different units.

I nearly bought the new Operation Flashpoint until i heard how its not as good as ARMA. I would have bought ARMA2 but unfortunatly you need a brand new supercomputer to run it, and im not buying a new PC for the sake of 1 game. I will wait for a lot more games needing those specs first, then i will buy ARMA2, as i know its really good, albeit a bit buggy at the moment.

Oh and i would love an Elder Scrolls V, Bethseda really are an amazing company. Such a huge game that. Elder Scrolls IV is another of my all time faves.

Arma II is great in concept but disappointing in execution when it comes to playability.

Saying it's "rough around the edges" is an understatement.

I have a i7 860 / 8GB RAM / ATI 5870 / RAID 0 Raptor drives and Arma II runs poorly.


Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising on the other hand is VERY playable (aside from the AI bots) and very fun.

However Codemasters shares the same anti-PC customer service attitude as UBI-Soft and have announced there will be no Dedicated Server thus I cannot recommend it.


If you guys want a fun game to play for awhile as you wait for Bad Company 2 to be released from DICE check out Global Operations.

It was a "counter-strike" killer that didn't get a chance to exceed everyone's expectations because it was done on a modified Lithtech engine that had some bullet drop / warping issues.

I still find it to be one of the top three shooters of all time even if it's not so "tactical".

It is now abandonware and can be downloaded for free.

The community made some amazing patches and fixes for it over the past 7 years.

Check it out guys when you get a chance.

Download and install instructions are in the link -


http://tlp.proboards.com/index...n=display&thread=556

quote:

Originally posted by TheNinjaboy:
MW2 will do "ok" on the PC side.

MW3 will not.


PC Gamers are slowly becoming unwilling to comprise for poor development and crappy workmanship.


Players are tired of getting burnt by companies like Codemasters and UBI-Soft.

While I agree with you about the the 100vs100 I disagree with you on all the other points especially the dedicated server portion.

If a dedicated server isn't something that someone can afford or wishes to maintain then they could still go with a listen server where they could host/play.


There will always be dedicated servers up for a good MP PC game if the developer allows it.

I for one don't want to comprise on quality and I would rather play on someone else's dedicated server then a horrible listen server hosted on a 768k upload residential cable modem.


Right now MW2's failure can be summed up best like this:

Extremely short single player (5 hours)

-Joining online servers is a joke, you're forced to enter a random server on a random map with random people. It feels like I'm playing the Xbox 360 with a mouse and keyboard.

-The servers you're forced to join doesn't always have the best ping.

-Steam is required, and it's permanently installed on your steam account. You can't sell the game later...

-Gigantic maps with only 8 vs 8 or 8 person free for all. Most people camp while others run around aimlessly before getting shot.

-Poor performance on high end hardware.

-No dedicated servers
-No Leaning
-No Modding
-9v9 capped servers (even though I agree with you it should still be an OPTION)
-It costs 10 dollars more than every other PC game
-No kicking people out of started matches
If the host leaves, there is a five second delay until a random person is chosen
No going into the console to tweak settings
Host gets a ping advantage


There is no reason to keep playing after the single player is completed.

So basically a console port? How crappy. No lean?