Quake3World

lol

andyman wrote:

Nightshade wrote:Already here...

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/u ... rn_warfare

PERFECT hahahaha

I wonder if they'll release a Painting Rocks, Filling Sandbags, and Digging Latrines Pack? The downloadable content is virtually limitless here.

Unlockable staff duty, mail room, and special bonus arcade game 'throw pebbles in a cup'

Cliff hanging ending? It's the video game equivalent of ending your song with a soft fade out. I want a good single-player game, not to waste my time killing 14 year-olds, I can do that IRL. Fuck off you nerds, not going to buy this.

Not until it is cheap and/or patched into a proper PC game.

lol u can edit the config file to show 10 bars instead of 4. each bar represents 20 ping or something like that. i wonder why iw didn't set it up like that?...lol?...

guess who the host is?...

By your logic, that would be FireBlade.

yeah, i dont quite understand

By the way, why did my XBox tell me there was a game update for MW2 when I started the game for the first time on release day? Case of bad QA?

ffs, I just figured that at least three of my "friends", who I had classed as hardcore Wii or PC gamers actually went ahead and bought a console, for which they bought MW2 as well. Turns out they bought PS3's, without my consent orcourse. Stupid fuckers.

full bars = 0 ping...1 bar equals more than 200...or 300 whatever(20 or 30 per bar)...point is they didn't want the 10 bars cuz it shows most everyone has a shitty connect and u can tell who the host is...

also i tried it out and from the look of it, when i am not host the best connect i get is always over 100 ping...usually closer to 200...thats if the bars represent best case 20...

lag, crappy team, etc

in that ss, somraw and munte96 would show up as 3 or 4 bars in default settings...

so iwnet thought this guy was best choice for host? lol?...

wonder if IW completely shitting on the PC version and fan base that gave birth the entire genre by yanking out every feature we've taken for granted since quake is going to be a trend going forward. :/

I'm really on the fence as to if I'm going to buy MW2.
If I buy it, I'm voting with my $ that it's perfectly ok to shit on me.
If I don't get it on principal the PC share of the game's revenue will drop lower than it is; causing them to shit on PC even more since the xbox is the target crowd.

scared? wrote:full bars = 0 ping...1 bar equals more than 200...or 300 whatever(20 or 30 per bar)...point is they didn't want the 10 bars cuz it shows most everyone has a shitty connect and u can tell who the host is...

also i tried it out and from the look of it, when i am not host the best connect i get is always over 100 ping...usually closer to 200...thats if the bars represent best case 20...

Jesus christ, what a retarded, convoluted system.
Just show actual ping. Low good, high bad...not that complex, actually...less complex than this.

Plan B wrote:

scared? wrote:full bars = 0 ping...1 bar equals more than 200...or 300 whatever(20 or 30 per bar)...point is they didn't want the 10 bars cuz it shows most everyone has a shitty connect and u can tell who the host is...

also i tried it out and from the look of it, when i am not host the best connect i get is always over 100 ping...usually closer to 200...thats if the bars represent best case 20...

Jesus christ, what a retarded, convoluted system.
Just show actual ping. Low good, high bad...not that complex, actually...less complex than this.

They probably coded it that way for the consoles and couldn't be arsed to spend time changing a few lines of code to show the ping.

they don't want to show ping cuz it would be bad. i just tried to play and couldn't get more than 1 bar out of 10...tried about 10 different servers. almost everyone had less than 5 bars on every server...cept of course the host...

i really can't see them leaving it like this...its just unplayable for the most part...

Obviously that last screen is an extreme but at what point is does it become unpleasant? people keep comparing it to dedicated servers with sub 100 ping...well if the entire net code is different in this game wouldn't it be optimized for a experience with higher ping. Obviously I don't have it for pc..but they have been doing p2p games like these for years on different platforms, hell I was playing Uncharted 2 with a bunch of frenchies a couple weeks ago and while you could tell it a was lagging a bit but it certainly wasn't unplayable. Also, all this omgwtf host has advantage!!111. How exactly? He has the same latency to you as you do to him...or do people think all the traffic flows through him like he was a dedicated server? its peer to peer, not peer to host to other peer no? can anyone tell me the responsibility of the host after all the initial connections are made? I would interpret that last screen shot and say the person who took it had a bad connection to everyone but the host...who sets up the initial connections.

I was watching a mwf2 pc stream on jtv yesterday and he wasn't having any issues.

judging from my attempt to play just now...it's not really that extreme...

that guy on jtv could have been host...if u don't have at least a 3 to 4 teetering bar connection(default settings) u immediately notice u can't maintain a sprint without holding the button down for about a second...and it just sucks all around...

Extensive PS3 vs XBox 360 graphics comparison:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digit ... 2-face-off

Spoiler: XBox 360 wins.

shaft wrote:Obviously that last screen is an extreme but at what point is does it become unpleasant? people keep comparing it to dedicated servers with sub 100 ping...well if the entire net code is different in this game wouldn't it be optimized for a experience with higher ping. Obviously I don't have it for pc..but they have been doing p2p games like these for years on different platforms, hell I was playing Uncharted 2 with a bunch of frenchies a couple weeks ago and while you could tell it a was lagging a bit but it certainly wasn't unplayable. Also, all this omgwtf host has advantage!!111. How exactly? He has the same latency to you as you do to him...or do people think all the traffic flows through him like he was a dedicated server? its peer to peer, not peer to host to other peer no? can anyone tell me the responsibility of the host after all the initial connections are made? I would interpret that last screen shot and say the person who took it had a bad connection to everyone but the host...who sets up the initial connections.

I was watching a mwf2 pc stream on jtv yesterday and he wasn't having any issues.

Good questions indeed. If it's truly peer-to-peer then what do those bars mean at all? It can't be a ping expressed as a single number because it's completely different from a dedicated server where it represents your connection to a single endpoint.

i can tell u what the bars mean...the command is "scoresping_interval" the default settings are 100 ping per bar. not very accurate. i'm sure iw did that on purpose to cover their crappy iwnet failure. anyways the above screenshots have the scoresping set at 20 and the maxbars at 10(instead of 4). i thought a 200 ping range was a little low, so i changed the scoresping to 40 (so the range is now 400)and i can read my ping accurately...and guess what...its sucks!

Yeah but a ping to who? To the host? How much does that tell you in a p2p situation?

I'm wondering how MW2's multiplayer works. I mean, does the host serve as a classic listen server or is there something else going on?

classic listen server...