Top
440°

Modern Warfare 3 interview: 'The hardest part is the stress'

Modern Warfare 3 producer Mark Rubin talks about working on the world's biggest game franchise, why 3D engines are not as important as fun, and updating Modern Warfare 3 post-release without patches.

Read Full Story >>
guardian.co.uk
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
Pandamobile2963d ago

Soooo, the weapon config files are serverside, rather than clientside?

FragMnTagM2962d ago

Didn't Reach already do this?

I remember many times signing in with no patch/update and the playlist data and stuff like that was changed.

So I don't think they are the first to do this.

ATi_Elite2962d ago (Edited 2962d ago )

they are full of shite! anytime you tweak or fix a game it's called a patch and 90% of the time you gotta download a patch to fix it.

They must have a few items only accessible on the server side but other than that this article is over stating the truth. PC has been doing MMo's for a while and they still have patches even with many objects on the server side.

accessing the info from your HDD is faster than getting it from a server so I see why COD games LAG so dam much cause the idiots are putting too much info on the server side along with that STUPID p2p play system.

Guarantee a patch will be released with in 10 days after MW3 launch.

so many disagree = so many people who do not know how anything works.

theEx1Le2962d ago

There will be a launch day patch, there has been in the last 3 cods. The most annoying thing is the game seems perfect just pre-launch. I always get cod at least 3 days before launch and its fine, when the first patch hits, bam! its ruined in some fashion. MW2 was the party system fecked up and no trophies for single player, WaW was just unplayable because it was impossible to find a game and black ops was the same. All of these problems weren't there days before launch.

Jdoki2962d ago

Sounds to me like they've just chucked as much as they can server side.

However, Guild Wars does background patching - so it's not impossible - I just can't see how MW3 would do it when it's essential everyone is on the same version.

They could possibly stream patches for MP while the player is in SP. Or they could drip files down when a player accesses the MP menu and you have to wait for it to download the player config files - but I'd be shocked if they never launch any patches.

As you said ATI, sticking everything server side could cause performance problems.

-Alpha2962d ago (Edited 2962d ago )

I remember Naughty Dog said the same thing, but I totally recall downloading patches for the MP. Sounds like wordplay.

RyuCloudStrife2962d ago

your CoD's #1 fan since you comment on all their articles lol

Christopher2962d ago (Edited 2962d ago )

Weapon config (point values) and similar multiplayer tracking elements (kill streaks, k/d ratio, etc.) have to be server side, otherwise there would be a lot of hacking that would imbalance multiplayer like never before.

This pretty much just says they can do some updates with the servers, but everyone already does this normally. There will still be patches, though, that players will have to download and update.

bozebo2961d ago

Chances are that your player settings are stored on Activision's central servers and the details are pulled from them by the game servers (or P2P host) that you connect to which then handle basic 'anti-cheating' (ammo, health, kill counts etc. but that is just sensible programming) and report back to the Activision servers - which is where any security problem will be (P2P host hacking like hacked MW2 lobbies or potential dedicated server hacking). I don't even know if it will have dedis - but BF3's dedis can only be run by authorised game server providers for security reasons (this might be why MW2 had no dedis but the unlocks and things were client side anyway!).

It is good that they are doing it this new way because they can make many tweaks without interrupting the game experience but on some occasions there will be standard patches to application modules to fix bugs as normal.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2961d ago
Wizziokid2963d ago

they will need this tech if BO and MW2 are anything to go by.

r1sh122962d ago

BO and WaW could be updated without a patch...
Its an INI file which gets updated, look at black ops top right corner to see the latest version of that file.

Its not new tech, treyarch have used it for some time, for some reason MW2 didnt have it.
MW3 will, I think I read a while back that gears will have something similar

theonlylolking2962d ago

So that means we will get poor hit detection like all treyarch call of duty's. =(

Motorola2962d ago

IW get hit detection pretty good. At least on PC.

Hayabusa 1172962d ago

Yeah, that makes me suspicious. Aside from the playback feature (which wasn't well implemented in Black Ops in my opinion) there isn't anything from Treyarch that IW should be copying. Everything Treyarch does in their COD games feel inferior to IW. Let's hope it actually won't affect hit detection and latency :p

bozebo2961d ago (Edited 2961d ago )

Treyarch's playback was programmed by IW in the original engine that BO borrows (same engine as CoD 4).

IW just didn't use it on consoles because the RAM and potential backing storage limitations meant the accuracy of recording had to be low (so what you see in playback isn't an accurate representation of the gameplay itself). CoD 4 on consoles was a port from PC unlike the newer ones which were/are developed primarily for the 360.

Also, it cannot record better than the network conditions allow - the networking is less precise on console games because MS set bandwidth limitations for games which are allowed to make use of XBL due to their XBL EULA and service requirements which state a minimum broadband speed that games cannot exceed! Forge mode in Halo does though, but the core MP doesn't.

Also, if a game is to be P2P it can't have highly accurate networking because home 'server' conditions are unpredictable - so they go for a low threshold of quality across the board to reduce disconnects and host swapping in-game and to speed up matchmaking.

Consoles need dedicated servers too, in all honesty.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2961d ago
grailly2962d ago

I've heard this many times for other games, but there always were patches after all

r1sh122962d ago

In a case like this, the reason game devs do it is to try and balance the game if they find a gun to be too powerful.
An INI file can allow simple damage changes caused by weapons etc...
Where as a patch would fix graphics issues, threads colour, lighting and some bugs to clean the game up.
They could still use a patch to change weapon damage, but if there is a massive outcry like with painkiller, it can be done remotely to get a 'hot fix' in place to stop people getting annoyed.

Show all comments (46)
The story is too old to be commented.