JaggedSac said:
I agree. More than 16 and things are more likely to get chaotic and unorganized, unless you are in a clan match, and especially in a game like CoD where the maps are not really open, and there isn't any squad based support(aka, Battlefield). Tribes, Battlefield, UT2004(for some modes), those games need large numbers of players to fill up the battlefields and not seem empty. They were designed for large numbers. People seem to forget that having more players does not make a game better. In fact, that is just silly. Pong would be much better with 30 people playing at once. ZOMG. Player count should revolve around a game's design, not a platform's capabilities. |
Player count should revolve around the number of players people want to play with. Don't like 32v32? Make your own game or join one with a player limmit you like.
The problem with 9v9 multiplayer limmit is it's going to feel so ameture on the PC. The game was obviously designed for consoles due to all the limmitations they put on it, which means it will be a below average PC FPS.
