Published on August 1st, 2013 | by CodCom
Dedicated Servers versus P2P for Call of Duty
It’s about time that Activision look into getting dedicated servers for Call of Duty. For most multiplayer games, getting a dedicated server or just do it via peer-to-peer can be a pain. P2P is intended for small multiplayer games. But with Call of Duty and it’s 9th (Ghost) franchise, it would be more plausible to finally have a dedicated server.
CoD v BF
The people at DICE and EA did the right thing when they provided a dedicated server for their console players. Yes, it will cost Activision for the dedicated servers. Dedicated are chump change compared to the amount of money they earn from the DLCs alone.
One of the most frustrating things when playing multiplayer is the LAG. Seriously, can you think of an instance where lag did not ruin your game? Think of that game where you’re finally getting the next achievement and then your game freezes up because your host just went offline. Since matchmaking would not rely on who has the fastest connection anymore, it would be faster to get into games. The speed of your game will not rely on who is hosting it anymore.
It doesn’t eliminate the lag completely. The system is not perfect, after all. We are assured that we can go back and still play the first Modern Warfare or Black Ops anytime we want since it is peer-to-peer and there’s no server that shuts down. Imagine a scenario where we have a dedicated server for all Call of Duty games. And for some bizarre reason Activision tanks and needs to take out the dedicated server, with it the chance to play older games. Good bye, nostalgic gaming. Admit it. You still play your old games from time to time.
So yeah, dedicated servers have a downside. But do you see Activision tanking in the near future? Didn’t think so. It really is about time that they get to the bottom of this or find a miracle solution to eliminate the lag in their games.