BFV dedicated servers

Comments

  • VBALL_MVP
    6177 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    After seeing JF's interview with Dan Berlin it was the unanswered questions that raised a few concerns..
    especially when DB was asked "Will there be dedicated servers?".. The answer was.."I can't comment on anything like that right now"..

    why not?

    To be tight lipped on an obvious part of BF gaming kind of make you think they are actually looking at an alternative.

    The game can have all of the cotton candy whizz bang new innervate mechanics , but without dedicated servers and the ability to control rented servers it will be a deal breaker for me...not to mention what plans they have for Anti-cheat..

    So..I'm not going to make a decision on BFV till they are able to answer these very basic questions.



    Probably because they are going to try to use cloud services. They would be a huge leap from dedicated servers.

    Please explain what you think cloud services are and what you think the current iteration of dedicated server is for RSP....just curious.

    Sounds like a leading question as if you don't think I know what cloud services are.

    A dedicated server is, by definition, physical server that is purchased or rented entirely for one companies needs. So it is managed and controlled by EA and the specs of it are also controlled by them. Also when they go down they go offline (as we seen with server rebootsreboots). With cloud services, while they loose control on the servers and how they are configured, they gain the advatage of fully virtualized systems that are up and guaranteed by the provider. They are easier to manage and expand and cheaper to have in multiple locations. This would help the whole no servers in my region issues.

    Titanfall 2 boasted about numerous advatages they had going to cloud services.

    https://www.engadget.com/2016/06/15/titanfall-2-servers-google-amazon-azure/

    There's also the misconceptions that when you rent a "dedicated server" for say BF 3 or 4 you're getting a full physical box. You aren't. You're getting an instance of the game server (software) running alongside multiple other game server instances.


    As far as cloud services are concerned BF1 is run on AWS EC2. Last I checked and worked with it it was a cloud service. So if your network architecture is structured to only work with one service, then you're kinda stuck with using their network. Hence the limited server coverage with BF1. They can only setup servers where AWS EC2 is supported. The same applies if they expanded to MS Azure. Including MS Azure doesn't really expand your network. Their data centers are at the same locations as EC2 in most cases ... or blocks away. Azure (last I looked) did have DC's in South Africa where EC2 doesn't offer coverage.

    So being technical .... by using cloud services for a product service that relies of time sensitive data transfer you are limiting yourself with coverage. For Web it's great, not so much for gaming when you sell to regions/areas/markets that you cannot directly support.

    edit ....

    Amazons AWS EC2 Locations
    http://ec2-reachability.amazonaws.com/

    This is where we have servers for BF1. If they maintain usage with EC2 this is where we will have servers for BFV.

    Yes....I remember BF4 had 4 instances on a server.

    Azure has way more locations. And have grown more. To me it would be better to have it there.
  • Rev0verDrive
    6722 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    VBALL_MVP wrote:
    Yes....I remember BF4 had 4 instances on a server.

    Azure has way more locations. And have grown more. To me it would be better to have it there.

    Instances per server depended on the provider, hardware and slot counts per instance. It varied greatly. NFOServers vs GameServers.com vs. MultiPlay and so forth. I always used NFO for BF after BF 2/2142 (Leet/Branzone dedi boxes).

    Azure really doesn't offer that much more coverage when you compare them. Their South Africa locals haven't opened yet which leaves that continent without coverage. IBM might have a network there, but I don't think they have anything setup for gaming.

    https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/global-infrastructure/regions/

    https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/global-infrastructure/

    ^^^ They're basically identical. And typically when you run IP Location lookups they end at the same addresses (Backbone locals).
  • CrashCA
    1008 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Always enlightening, Rev. Thanks.
    So, a poor choice for world-wide gaming. Or did I miss something ?
  • Rev0verDrive
    6722 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    CrashCA wrote: »
    Always enlightening, Rev. Thanks.
    So, a poor choice for world-wide gaming. Or did I miss something ?

    Depends on who you market and sell to. If they strictly sold based on server locality it wouldn't be an issue.
  • StarscreamUK
    7272 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    CrashCA wrote: »
    As there is just one massive group of posts, it is easy to end up with multiple threads on same topic.

    I know what you are saying Crash, but if we ignored the rules for 1 thread other people would quite rightly say how come I couldn't do that.

    As far as servers, I've also asked and been told that there is nothing to announce as yet. Personally, despite being banned by badmins simply for being a mod, I much preferred the prior server systems, and wish they would stick with it. There will be reasons why they chose to do their own rsp thing, doesn't mean I total agree with them all :)
  • Jaskaman
    647 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Still waiting for the info about servers...
  • CrashCA
    1008 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I was implying these threads should be sorted, not one should get preference, sorry for confusion.
  • StarscreamUK
    7272 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    Until they add subsections its going to be slightly chaotic.
  • BetaFief
    655 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I haven't posted here since I was disappointed with Battlefield 1.

    However, the optimist in me hopes to see Battlefield 5 re-introduce Actual User-Hosted-Dedicated-Servers (at least the Pc version of the game) instead of Rent-a-servers or servers totally under dev-control.

    seriously don't think there's much of an excuse for EA/DICE to not have such a setup, but idk.
  • CrashCA
    1008 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Given the current server situation (not just AUS ones). EA should reassess their approach to servers
  • Doctorfurious54
    4 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited June 2018
    Hello world
    Metro hardcore BF4 tournament 8v8 start september
    Vets Screaming Eagles, Gore, Goa, PWPL
    Add your clan, probably we go on BFV for next event. Just need good server

  • -AOSN-RageWolff
    9 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    I miss the Procon days!
  • CrashCA
    1008 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I miss functioning servers
  • S1ngular1ty
    801 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    Popa2caps wrote: »
    After seeing JF's interview with Dan Berlin it was the unanswered questions that raised a few concerns..
    especially when DB was asked "Will there be dedicated servers?".. The answer was.."I can't comment on anything like that right now"..

    why not?

    To be tight lipped on an obvious part of BF gaming kind of make you think they are actually looking at an alternative.

    The game can have all of the cotton candy whizz bang new innervate mechanics , but without dedicated servers and the ability to control rented servers it will be a deal breaker for me...not to mention what plans they have for Anti-cheat..

    So..I'm not going to make a decision on BFV till they are able to answer these very basic questions.



    Is there a Battlefield title without dedicated servers?

    Yes, BF1. The so-called dedicated servers are a joke.

  • S1ngular1ty
    801 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    edited June 2018
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    After seeing JF's interview with Dan Berlin it was the unanswered questions that raised a few concerns..
    especially when DB was asked "Will there be dedicated servers?".. The answer was.."I can't comment on anything like that right now"..

    why not?

    To be tight lipped on an obvious part of BF gaming kind of make you think they are actually looking at an alternative.

    The game can have all of the cotton candy whizz bang new innervate mechanics , but without dedicated servers and the ability to control rented servers it will be a deal breaker for me...not to mention what plans they have for Anti-cheat..

    So..I'm not going to make a decision on BFV till they are able to answer these very basic questions.



    Probably because they are going to try to use cloud services. They would be a huge leap from dedicated servers.

    Please explain what you think cloud services are and what you think the current iteration of dedicated server is for RSP....just curious.

    Sounds like a leading question as if you don't think I know what cloud services are.

    A dedicated server is, by definition, physical server that is purchased or rented entirely for one companies needs. So it is managed and controlled by EA and the specs of it are also controlled by them. Also when they go down they go offline (as we seen with server rebootsreboots). With cloud services, while they loose control on the servers and how they are configured, they gain the advatage of fully virtualized systems that are up and guaranteed by the provider. They are easier to manage and expand and cheaper to have in multiple locations. This would help the whole no servers in my region issues.

    Titanfall 2 boasted about numerous advatages they had going to cloud services.

    https://www.engadget.com/2016/06/15/titanfall-2-servers-google-amazon-azure/

    There's also the misconceptions that when you rent a "dedicated server" for say BF 3 or 4 you're getting a full physical box. You aren't. You're getting an instance of the game server (software) running alongside multiple other game server instances.


    As far as cloud services are concerned BF1 is run on AWS EC2. Last I checked and worked with it it was a cloud service. So if your network architecture is structured to only work with one service, then you're kinda stuck with using their network. Hence the limited server coverage with BF1. They can only setup servers where AWS EC2 is supported. The same applies if they expanded to MS Azure. Including MS Azure doesn't really expand your network. Their data centers are at the same locations as EC2 in most cases ... or blocks away. Azure (last I looked) did have DC's in South Africa where EC2 doesn't offer coverage.

    So being technical .... by using cloud services for a product service that relies of time sensitive data transfer you are limiting yourself with coverage. For Web it's great, not so much for gaming when you sell to regions/areas/markets that you cannot directly support.

    edit ....

    Amazons AWS EC2 Locations
    http://ec2-reachability.amazonaws.com/

    This is where we have servers for BF1. If they maintain usage with EC2 this is where we will have servers for BFV.

    I don't think anyone cares if they have a full box or not. We just want the level of control over the server we had with BF3 and BF4 where we could access server files and use admin tools like procon. I would be fine with servers running on ANY platform like AWS or Azure if we had access to server files and the ability to use 3rd party admin tools.
    ..
    There is no reason why this can't be done.
    ..
    I rarely had problems running virtual servers with NFO and like you said, they were running multiple instances on 1 box.
  • BetaFief
    655 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I don't think anyone cares if they have a full box or not. We just want the level of control over the server we had with BF3 and BF4 where we could access server files and use admin tools like procon. I would be fine with servers running on ANY platform like AWS or Azure if we had access to server files and the ability to use 3rd party admin tools.
    ..
    There is no reason why this can't be done.
    ..
    I rarely had problems running virtual servers with NFO and like you said, they were running multiple instances on 1 box.

    I think it's worth remembering that the level of control BF3 and BF4 had been almost a compromise/minimum compared to the level of control BF1942-BF2142 had available for server.. like "If you're not going to let us actually host our own servers on our own choice of hardware, at least let us have this"-kind of thing.

    Would highly prefer a return to the BF2-2142 model of User-hosted Dedicated Servers, however, as it would probably alleviate some of the shortcomings/issues people have been having with regards to server outages.
  • Rev0verDrive
    6722 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited June 2018
    I don't think anyone cares if they have a full box or not. We just want the level of control over the server we had with BF3 and BF4 where we could access server files and use admin tools like procon. I would be fine with servers running on ANY platform like AWS or Azure if we had access to server files and the ability to use 3rd party admin tools.
    ..
    There is no reason why this can't be done.
    ..
    I rarely had problems running virtual servers with NFO and like you said, they were running multiple instances on 1 box.

    1. It wa just a clarification. Too many people think dedicated server means one server has the resources of a whole physical box.
    2. Server admins did not have access to Server files in BF3 or BF4. You only had access to a basic config. Not the core game files.

    Do to the inequality in performance over multiple GSP's and the fact that one GSP violated their contract and exposed the core files, EA decided to lock down files and go AWS EC2 cloud. Outcry from the community is what eventually got us the RSP.

    3. NFO does not use VDS for BF3 or BF4. The use a service daemon to run multiple game server instances as services under a single OS. Each service instance is allocated dedicated CPU and RAM via the service daemon. You know this, we've been through this before.

    NXVDTpe.jpg

  • BetaFief
    655 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member

    Do to the inequality in performance over multiple GSP's and the fact that one GSP violated their contract and exposed the core files, EA decided to lock down files and go AWS EC2 cloud. Outcry from the community is what eventually got us the RSP.

    Wait, isn't that partially why Battlefield: Bad Company 2 servers are still up and running?
  • Rev0verDrive
    6722 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited June 2018
    BetaFief wrote: »

    Do to the inequality in performance over multiple GSP's and the fact that one GSP violated their contract and exposed the core files, EA decided to lock down files and go AWS EC2 cloud. Outcry from the community is what eventually got us the RSP.

    Wait, isn't that partially why Battlefield: Bad Company 2 servers are still up and running?

    No, BFBC2 servers are completely GSP rentals via contract with EA. Same format as BF3, 4 and hardline. BC2 was the game that literally ended self hosting in the BF franchise.

    Some contracted GSP had staff that exposed the dedicated server files to a clan of friends. This exposure led to a slew of new cheats and leaderboard hacks.

    "empty servers showing as mostly full" ... ring any bells?

    Server file core exposure isn't a good thing if you plan on having a ranking/progression system. It just leads to cheats/hacks and other issues.
Sign In or Register to comment.