I find it funny that some people who don't play PC games feel qualified to give their opinion on stuff most PC games have like dedicated servers.

Bottom line, this game's multiplayer is severely dumbed down relative to what other PC games have. If you can't see that you're either ignorant or intentionally ignoring stuff to make other gamers look bad.

The irony is so thick you can cut it with a spoon.

Actually I was thinking the advantage and ease of local MP, which obviously isn't possible on the PC version.

Why should any studio care about PC gamers as long as there are so many pirate copies? This is where pirating got PC gaming, no sane publisher will put any kind of financial risk in PC gaming anymore.
Steam being the only working copy protection right now is where pirating got PC gamers and it's a better solution than not releasing for PC anymore at all...

I've always wondered why devs don't put in split-screen in PC games, is there any reason in particular? I mean, with tons more processing power than consoles (if we talk higher-end PCs), and the ability to power multiple displays, wouldn't PC games be even better suited in some ways for split-screen than consoles?

Split screen is less and less common in PC games (it used to be quite common in the 90s).

One of the big reasons (IMO) is that PC owners typically only have one mouse, and games are using more and more keys making it awkward to share a keyboard between two players, let alone more than that.

Of course PC games also allow keypads, but the people using those are probably a minority...

Yeah, but PCs have tons of USB ports for extra mice and keyboards and stuff.

idk, seems kinda silly to omit something like this, really.

I wouldn't end up labelling it as a boycott.  I would say it is a person tired of being nickled and dimed deciding they don't want any part of it.  Anyhow, I don't see what exactly Activision is going for.  Well they do a persistent world type game like World of Warcraft, based around the Modern Warfare universe that players level up in and fight persistent battles?  They will have to set aside some servers to manage to do that.  If they don't, then they have falling into the realm of Phantasy Star Online.

Their market survey data indicates that PC gamers usually game alone in person, on their rigs, so it doesn't make sense to support it.  They make decisions based upon what they believe the market for a machine is.  For example, with a Command and Conquer: Kane's Wrath, EA pulled out the world domination mode that was like Risk, on the 360 version, because EA's marketing data stated that 360 gamers aren't into turn-based strategy.  So, they put a more action-oriented strategy mode.

Tomayto, tomato.

I really can't see how refusing to buy a game because you have to pay for online multiplayer is any different to refusing to buy a game that costs $10 more and has less features than its predecessor.

Maybe if console owners made a stand and supported these sort of actions, instead of lapping up whatever publishers throw at them and criticisng what are basically pissed off customers, we wouldn't be in the situation where the biggest games company in the world wants you to pay to play.