Modern Warfare 2 - HWC Benchmark or Not?

[Jonwall]

Originally Posted by Surfer_2099

Last time I checked a 52 inch 1080p plasma or LCD television is not any more portable than a computer.

Cheers!
Useless_Post_Canuck :)

Not many people play on a 52" tv, in fact MOST dont. Probably 99% of households in north america do however have a tv, meaning they only need to take the console with them. I would call that more portable than an entire computer seeing as most people dont have an extra desk and monitor set aside for a computer that may show up.

A steam version of MW2 was leaked on to a tracker im on, and no one even wants it. Someone made a comment about how pathetic it is when not only do people not want to buy your game that cost millions to produce, they dont even want to WASTE bandwidth pirating it. Good job infinity ward, stick to consoles and dont even bother releasing such a pathetic version for pc ever again. Come back when youve got something worth buying.

[Zero82z]

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

Price is $69.99 in Canada? There's another knock against it.

$70 on PC? I was never really big on this game, but after no dedicated servers, a matchmaking service, and 18-player limit, I just have to say screw them. No way in hell I'd ever pay for this game unless it cost me $5.

[SKYMTL]

I'm hoping to see a sale on it but I don't see any reason to pick it up for personal use. I'm still loving COD: WAW.

[bojangles]

I was hoping that Nvidia/ATI would have worked closely on this title to support better graphics and such (TWIMTBP, etc.), but they haven't. Perhaps Activision/IW is the most close-minded publisher/developer EVER.

I think Blizzard is becoming this way too. It's all about the money. Greedy bastards.

[Realityshift]

I was hoping that Nvidia/ATI would have worked closely on this title to support better graphics and such (TWIMTBP, etc.), but they haven't. Perhaps Activision/IW is the most close-minded publisher/developer EVER.

I think Blizzard is becoming this way too. It's all about the money. Greedy bastards.

Activision and Blizz are one and the same now.... so ya they are going the same direction, I blame this heavily on WoW.

The biggest issue I have with this whole game, is that not only are they trying to move PC gamers to console, which many of us do not want to do and prefer mouse and keyboard gaming, but they are also systematically killing off any of the truly decent PC game studios and have been for years. 10 years ago there where close to 100 different video game studios, now theres what? 10 mainstream ones? and out of those 10 theres probubly 4 partnerships total. The days of making computer games in your garage with a bunch of friends just because you love video games is over, there is no more passion in the buisness its all about mass marketing and income. I wont play this game because I really didnt like the last 2, for that kind of money I want some sort of decent multi play to back it, I wont pay more then $29 for a game that im only going to play as a single player. People can talk for hours about how they loved CoD 4 and 5 online, but I thought it stunk, and there are far better online games out there that cost less and play better...

Lets face it, the reason this game is going to do well is because of the 11-16 age group with parents who dont have time to spend with their kids so they buy them consoles and video games whenever they want, they dont care about the gaming industry, they dont have any feel for what it once was and for what its becoming, and they dont have a grasp of finances, they see a game and they want to play it. This is exactly what happened with wow, WoW took what all other MMOs had and childized it, I know 9 year olds that can play that game, and for good reason, blizz knew that if they marketed it for the under 20 age group that they would easily be able to draw in the day care parents money. People like, I assume, most of us on this forum, who spend thousands of dollars a year on our rigs, who play video games for the love of it, who remember the good old days of quake, wolfenstien, and doom, are being thrown aside.

I have already seen to many people defending this game within our own ranks, saying oh well it doesnt matter how much it costs its still going to be good and ill buy it anyways. Thats fine, you probubly fall within A/IWs marketing catagory and therefore wouldnt really see the difference here. I like to believe Im one of the few who can disern the difference between a good game and a hack job.

[vulcan500rider]

Originally Posted by bojangles

@ SKYMTL and Dr_BenD_over

You're so right. They're trying to get the people to go to console. It's pure advertisement now. I can always go back to the classics and play the games over. With games today? Not so much.

I couldn't agree more. Fallout 1 & 2 get pulled out every year or so, as does Warcraft III, the Quest for Glory series (well, 3-5 anyway) and a number of others.

Now, there have been a few exceptions in the recent past. Portal will be a game I pull out again and again, I think. There's probably a few others in there too, but a lot of it is just drivel.

[r0bc]

Originally Posted by Thund3rball

Who voted yes? lol

I did

A lot of sites are predicting Modern Warfare 2 will become the most lucrative entertainment launch of all time.
If thats the case it wouldn't hurt having benchmarks, alot of people are going to own it regardless of the hate. I'm having a hard time not buying it, I loved the first one and never played it online.

[Evylldemon]

Originally Posted by r0bc

I did

A lot of sites are predicting Modern Warfare 2 will become the most lucrative entertainment launch of all time.

Possibly for the console but it's going to do poorly for the PC (which is what this poll is about). It barely made it on the steam top sellers list and I doubt it will do much better at launch.

[r0bc]

But it did make steam top sellers list regardless.
I think its going to do OK on the PC, time will tell.

[belgolas]

I vote a strong NO. Why? Well if this is in there then that kicks out a chance of a different more demanding title. We ALL know that MW2 will run with a 100+FPS on all new cards so why bother. Might as well put a half life benchmark in there because we all can run it. Put something more useful in there. Popularity doesn't mean anything or else we would have a WOW benchmark or a Sims 3 benchmark in there. Maybe Empire Total War as a benchmark. It would be hard to benchmark and may not be the best game but it is demanding and I for one would like to know if newer hardware does much better or not. Another game could be Tropico 3 or ARMA 2. L4D2 could be another one but we all know that any recent hardware can run it max above 60 FPS.

I also agree that older games in general have more lasting appeal. I still love the first dawn of war, starcraft, warcraft 3, Counter Strike Source(not that old but still a great game showing its age), most of the command and conquers, Rise of nations, age of empires series (love ALL of them), half-life series, early call of duty series, red faction 1, early total war series, stronghold 1, stubbs the zombie, some of the early unreal's are a lot of fun still, early battlefields (LOVE 1942 with mods), Homeworld series, some of the early medal of honors series, Farcry 1, Simcity 4 (much better than the latest crap), no one lives forever, some of the earlier star wars RPGs, early empire earth, operation flashpoint, Red Orchestra, commander keen, etc. Then I could go on about some of the early great console games that are still fun too play like goldern eye 007, perfect dark, mario series, jet force Gemini, etc etc etc.

There are some great titles now but not as frequent as before.