Are Dedicated Servers Really That Important for CoD Ghosts?

It’s been confirmed that Call of Duty Ghosts will have dedicated servers after Mark Ruben spoke during the Microsoft Media briefing.

But Are Dedicated Servers Really That Important for CoD Ghosts?

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
ATi_Elite1690d ago (Edited 1690d ago )

are brakes and tires really important for race cars?

COD along with any online game ESPECIALLY FPS needs Dedicated Servers.

I don't want "little Johnny" hosting a game on his turtle slow, Lag infested internet service making NOT so much fun for everyone when the game should be on a State of the Art server making it fair and enjoyable for ALL.

ErcsYou1690d ago

Im still waiting for some info on these Dedicated servers. How many is the US getting? What about Europe? Where are these servers located? Will Each state Have thousands of servers spread out or will everyone in California have to ping to LA or SF? Will people close to these dedicated server have a advantage over people hundreds of miles away? Can we still use P2P if we want to? What if i live 300 miles away from these servers? What if i live in the mountains in a small community and P2P gives our small town a better ping to each other? I would really like Microsoft to address these issues.

Question: Are brakes and tires really important for race cars? Answer: Yes, they are important on the track but become worthless if you have to drive your race car on a back road made of ruff terrain covered in mud and rocks. You might as well just just stay local(P2P) if the path to the race track(DS) is too far away.

WrAiTh Sp3cTr31690d ago

If you plan on buying it for the XB1 then you probably won't have to worry. But anywhere else is a cause for concern I'm sure, even on 360, although it would be interesting if the Azure tech would be used by IW on the 360 or if it's allowed.

P0werVR1690d ago (Edited 1690d ago )

One Data Center alone is more than enough for a region. But providing two each within strategic points of each continent will provide full dedicated servers.

Microsoft since 2009 has been spending billions in preparation for Azure platform.

Finally Australia will be supported, since after current generation of bad connectivity in MP games in general. So they should thank Microsoft IF they're purchasing X1s for MP gaming that is.



I believe his analogy of tires and cars was general and not literal. You kinda took it too far, because we're talking about Data Centers not racing cars.

ErcsYou1690d ago (Edited 1690d ago )

@P0werVR. i refuse to believe 4 data centers will be enough for the US. I live in the central valley in California and i ping SAnFran in 29ms. People in Oregon will have to use the data center in Cali for there dedicated servers and i ping Oregon in 80ms. So every gamer in California will have a advantage over every gamer in Oregon or Washington with a half second less of lag. I understand that P2P can have its issues but forcing every one to use a dedicated server a thousand miles away will cause more issues than P2P ever did. I know we are all excited about the idea of a dedicated servers for every game but if your to far away from these data centers its kinda pointless. We no longer have to deal with a host advantage but we are now forced to play with more lag. I would prefer a choice.

also if your playing COD and "little Johnny" is hosting a game on his turtle slow, Lag infested internet service your service is probably worse since COD chooses the best connection for the host.

n4rc1690d ago

Seriously... Is it 2001 all over again? Lol

I could ping anywhere in NA and not see triple digits..

And I'm 150km from Toronto in a small town.. 11ms to the speed test server there..

That's like lan 10 years ago... Point I'm trying to make... If you arent in the middle of absolutely nowhere and don't get a better connection then p2p, its on your end...

For a fps.. Dedicated servers are a must... Or deal with lag switches, host migrations or drops.. Saturated connections and the dreaded "lag comp"..

BoriboyShoGUN1690d ago

"Lag infested internet service your service is probably worse since COD chooses the best connection for the host."
Do you actually believe that!! I run 89 mgbs Fios Quantum with a ping less then 10 and in Black Ops 1 i did get host a lot of the time and the rooms ran great! But it wasnt guaranteed either. In MW3 and BO2 I rarely got host and was in terribly laggy lobbies all too often. But im no longer concerned about COD. BF4 and KZ here i come.

One last thing dedicated servers can suck as well they arent the be all end all!!!

ErcsYou1690d ago (Edited 1690d ago )

@n4rc, nope. Its 2013 and i still can get pings over 100ms only traveling half way across the US. I guess my point is that a 20/30ms difference is a BIG difference. a 50ms ping on COD is noticeable when switching from a lobby with a 75ms ping.

@BoriboyShoGUN , well, i get some horrible lobbies too. A match my start out well until someone on the hosts side decides to start down loading files and watchings videos. COD chooses the best connection at the time and doesnt mean the connection will stay that way. Your 10ms ping my be good to one server but it doesnt mean your going to have a 10ms ping every where. Your internet provider speed will not determine your ping time. im using Comcast and have 30/mb dl speeds and can ping a city 30 miles away in 8ms. Also CODs net code sucks

I guess i could just not care because the Data center will be located close to me and give me a good ping but what about the rest of the country? What about Alaska, or Hawaii? If their only choice is a server on the main land or Canada why even play. They NEED P2P on COD. Then again most gamers probably play on TVs without using the game mode to reduce lag while playing over wifi so my concerns wont even effect them because they dont care.

I dont usually comment much due to the Fanboy gibberish that goes on around here but thank you for responding without attacking me. bubbles up for the conversation

P0werVR1690d ago (Edited 1690d ago )


I believe you underestimate the scale these data centers cover. These aren't simple data centers, these are Regional Data Centers. Either way, Microsoft has pot shot container data centers in differing part of the US.

If you do your research, you wouldn't be questioning Microsoft's dedications to these services.

Just recently after purchasing Nokia they are setting down a $250 million data center in Finland and is will be growing overtime until demand is met.


Besides, Washington is their state. Who's to say they will not have support. So your having wrong sense in how much ground these data centers cover.

n4rc1689d ago


yes... but you'll never see that difference..

furthest speed test center i can use on my phone is in Kentucky.. ~650 miles away..

57ms... on my cell phone, on wifi..

if your ping to the closest data center is 75ms (which is the most you'd likely get with a decent connection) then you can easily get used to it.

when it changes lobby to lobby, or host to host in the same game.. then it becomes impossible to really have a consistent experience

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1689d ago
s8anicslayer1690d ago (Edited 1690d ago )

I will quote one of my favorite comedians in reply to the title "Shirley you can't be serious"?. But since I actually read the article and to put it into layman's terms for the less tech savvy people...P2P sucks meaning having to rely on someone else's connection is crappy and with cloud (Dedicated Servers) the agony of having to deal with lag bandwith issues or just someone who is having a crappy match and quits in the middle of a game in turn throws everyone back to the lobby, you lose all your xp, bonuses, will now be a thing of the past with azure and ghosts on the X1.

MizTv1690d ago


ssj271690d ago (Edited 1690d ago )

They where not necessary before and they are not now for a COD game unless they actually make or use a good engine for it with better programmers.

Just look at the MP forage for ghost, the engine itself lag and is cheap. No dedicated server can fix a broken game.

Olympus1690d ago

Another reason why Xbox one is best for online multiplayer and Shooters. DEDICATED SERVERS probided by Microsoft...does Sony provide third party with dedicated servers? No.

DeadlyFire1689d ago

Its not provided at all. They are just synced in the Cloud. Only 2 benefits of the Cloud servers = Faster match making and a stable consistent host. Your distance still determines lag to any host. While you can assume all hosts are local they likely will be spread far and wide in certain regions.

Does Sony provide servers? Wow really? You don't think they would do so if they see it as necessary. They have done so more often than Microsoft with their first party games. I don't think its impossible to say they could do the same for third party as well if there are real cost effective benefits to it for them.

ErcsYou1690d ago (Edited 1690d ago )

srry, wrong reply

1689d ago
johndoe112111689d ago

People are just not getting it. The problem with past cod games was not the lack of dedicated servers, the problem was BAD PROGRAMMING. Regardless of how much dedicated servers there are if the game is not coded properly then it just won't work. Infinity ward and microsoft are trying to pull the wool over everyones eyes.

Black ops 2 had dedicated servers on PC and still PC players were complaining about bad hit detection and lag comp. MW2 had no dedicated servers and yet 90% of people had no hit detection and lag comp complaints. MW2 is considered one of if not the best, most smooth playing cod game ever. How did it accomplish that without dedicated servers? Simple, good programmers.

If infinity ward does not get there act together and sort out there programming issues then people will be back here in 4 months complaining about the game just as they did about every cod since black ops 1.

CarlosX3601689d ago

Sounds like the writer has never played a Call of Duty title to experience the various lag...

of course it's important!

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 1689d ago
1690d ago Replies(1)
HammadTheBeast1690d ago

Depends on the netcode. Plenty of laggy games in BF3 because of net code. It's a step in the right direction though.

thrust1690d ago

Yeah, look at quake 3 IMO the best net coding ever, I use to play that in a 56k modem and it was perfect same goes for CS.

FlyingFoxy1690d ago (Edited 1690d ago )

Are you serious, the only games i could play on dial up was like Worms 2 because it was turn based.

I remember trying Quake 2 and it lagged so bad, as did South Park and Delta Force land warrior, first FPS games i ever played online.

First time i ever got playable pings of like 70 or so was when i first moved to 128k broadband cable when RTCW and SOF2 were around. both of which were awesome games to play online.

But then i remember reading that Quake 3 was getting multiplayer on Dreamcast and wondered how it was gonna be smooth over the dial up it used, Half Life was supposed to be released with online multiplayer on it as well.

thrust1690d ago

Yeah it was great, I used gamespy, my ping was always about 52ms.

This was before dreamcast aswell and quake 4 on the DC was only 4 player at a time.

My dial up ISP at the time was yahoo cost £14.99 a month and it would cut off every 3 hours I had to reconnect after that! Like I said netcoding when we had 56k modems was important.

NarooN1690d ago

Quake 3 had better netcode than Q2 did, and Quake 3 still has some of the finest netcode around.

The Dreamcast did have a Broadband adapter you could buy, and it was bundled in with some Dreamcast bundles. I remember that the Dreamcast version of Quake 3 allowed cross-platform play with the PC users (Dreamcast version did have keyboard & mouse support as well.)

SolidDuck1690d ago

Is this the dumbest question I've read in a long time?

thrust1690d ago

They are important for any online game!

Show all comments (67)
The story is too old to be commented.