iif0xh0undii wrote:

 

Breaking it down like that might work when thinking in a simplistic way, but when you look at the topology it's entirely wrong.

 

You can argue that it is peer to peer, but it doesn't act that way.

No matter what, it's still a Peer Client. Period. The game will lag and cheat on you because Cheapfinity Ward can't man up and say to Activsion that we need dedicated servers for best playing experience. You also know that Activsion is the biggest cheapass in the industry while even smaller publishers and game companies can afford dedicated servers to give players the best online experience. I hope this game fails so much that it will my last COD game. I'm so tired of this crap that happens online.

Yes, I even stated that. It can be stated in an overly simplified way that it is a peer to peer arangement. We're all connecting to someone who's a participant in the game as well as the designated host/server for the match. I was simply stating that the topology isn't peer-to-peer. I won't wast time by explaining. Please search for this information on your own. You'll see why I made that statement.

Also, there are a lot of variables that exist in the "have vs. have nots" debate. I could argue that too, but it'd be a waste of time. You've made your decision already. Save yourself the time and money. Don't buy the game. Rent it. The biggest vote you can make is with your money. I suggest you optimize your connection and encourage everyone else to optimize their connections as well that you play with.

I'm with you on this Dex. I made a post some days ago about a new place for Fox to put info. I think he should call it "iiFoxhoundii's Compound" I think this would be a good place for it and other important info. His office is cool but it nore fun than serious which is good. "Compound" just sounds serious. Maybe Fox will give it a try.