Post by oTradeMark on Dec 1, 2011 19:00:01 GMT -5
Dedicated servers on PC can generate money, but dedicated servers on console costs it. You can't rent a Battlefield 3 server and play on it on 360/PS3, those are all DICE's own servers it's running. Seeing as how console sales are an overwhelming majority of COD income, I can see why COD doesn't have dedicated servers.
It doesn't have to be that way. There are plenty of console players who would love to run a dedicated server from a PC. Console games and PC dedicated servers are not incompatible. They just aren't allowed by the publishers (for the reasons I stated above). The world would be a much better place if they would just let people run their own servers.
I completely disagree with this statement... If you allow anyone to run a server you also allow anyone to manipulate that servers network traffic and even worse open up a greater chance of seeing in game hacks like the ones showing up on MW3 PC right now.
If consoles go to dedicated servers they have to be Activision owned and managed, any other way leads to a lot of cheating.
I can see Activision charging to rent dedicated servers though... I wouldn't mind renting a server if it meant I could always play on it with a consistent connection.
That would require a server browser like BF3 on console and other things that they are most likely not willing to implement any time soon.
Also, having a server browser leads to more boosting as players can arrange servers to join at certain times.