CoD Modern Warefare 2

[=JHF= JimmyT (CDN)]

People are getting frustrated thought with IWNet.  I've seen a couple of different posts on the IW forums about people exceeding their bandwidth for the month and getting charged substantial fees.  Another thing IW didn't think through.

Oh they probably did - but you already bought the game when you have that problem so Im not sure if they'd care.   On the bandwidth issue in the past they said "thats the ISP's concern not ours" or words to that effect. 

Personally I like that IW.net is providing itself as a virus delivery system.  Lol.

-- JT

[=JHF= Smoke]

my isp allows 250Gb.  quite a bit.  the closest i've ever come is around 75gb.  (my router keeps track)
theyre doing alot more than hosting games to even come close to the bandwidth limit.  unless theyre using their cellphone (which probably has a 5gb limit and isn't sufficient enough speed to host a game anyway)
I've given up reading the Iw forums anyway, i havent seen 1 useful post since the game's been released, and i feel bad for people that actually are looking for support for game issues.

[=JHF= JimmyT (CDN)]

Many ISP's have a much lower limit - 50-60 gig (up here at least).  That might be an issue, not sure.   Maybe they are just leaving it on all day, or downloading half the internet at the same time...

-- JT

[=JHF= HaveSocks]

The basic Comcast service max bandwidth usage is 50GB/month.  I don't know my exact usage, but I know its no where near that.  I know a few other cable carriers have bandwidth as low as 20-30GM/month, but they offer a larger tier setup than other carriers.

[=JHF= -gHoTi-]

As much as one would want to fault IW for more crap..  How could a game lobby-type service use that much bandwidth?  From what I understand, you can play on any computer once you have the game bought (the only advantage of steam, i think) so if you have to redownload the game (its big) or redownload your "profile" evey day, then maybe i understand.

Maybe I just do not understand these tubes that are the internets.

It's a rather complicated issue in the long run.  If it does well, the devs will think "Hey, this IWNet thing worked!  we will be rich!" and we lose out.  If the game does poorly on pc they will eventually think "we lost money on PC, we should not develop for PC anymore" and we lose out even harder.

How a major game developer/publisher can focus on a FPS for consoles more than a pc is beyond me, everyone and their mother knows that a mouse easily trumps a silly game-controller for accuracy and speed

[=JHF= Smoke]

now i know i made the right choice, too bad i don't have an xbox
http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2009/12/28/ice-t-demonstrates-his-call-of-duty-modern-warfare-2-gaming-skills-in-todays-daily-twitpic/#more-26886

[Hoffa]

Ice T can afford to pay for hacks 

[=JHF= HaveSocks]

Looks like Activision is looking to screw the consumer more.  For the next COD installment, by Treyarch most likely, and they are looking to make it subscription based.  Looks like they won't be getting my money again!

http://kotaku.com/5469025/activision-has-call-of-duty-7-loaded-for-holiday

[=JHF= Smoke]

just in case anyone missed it (i did  )
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2® Stimulus Package

[=JHF= HaveSocks]

just in case anyone missed it (i did  )
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2® Stimulus Package

Miss what?  An overpriced map pack that offer little in new features, and 2 rehashes of COD4 maps.  If I had the game I'd be willing to spend maybe $10 on it if it offered new maps exclusively.  The COD4 maps, although two of the better stock maps, I could do without.