Weekly BF

BFV dedicated servers

Comments

  • 0ld_yell0w
    406 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    The whole situation would make sense if they actively wants to kill the PC community. Going for the console players only would be a smart move because they are more "causual" players - log in, find a match - play.
    (Im not trying to slap console players here at all but it IS an easy/easier setup).

    The development would be far easier as they dont have to speculate in different setups at all,
    litterally one ring would bind them all and all players would get the same experience only differentiated on their connection to the internet.

    Im not a fan of Jackfrags neither Westie I actually think its the first of his videos Ive managed to watch all the way through, but hes got a point in this one.

    The talk about Anthem is in my book not related to anything BF'ish at all, its a whole different ballgame
    but I agree that releasing it now when BFV is struggling is at best .......

    So lets gather those EA guys and ..




  • StingX71
    817 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    You all realize were one game away from CoD's Peer to Peer Hosting. Think of all $ DICE/EA will save not having to pay for all them servers. They'll only have to pay for a few matchmaking/stats servers.

    Even if you're not a fan of RSP or don't like playing on private servers, you need to join this fight. I guarantee it won't be long until they take something away that you're in favor of. They keep taking, but not really offering anything.
  • A_Cool_Gorilla
    1374 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    StingX71 wrote: »
    You all realize were one game away from CoD's Peer to Peer Hosting. Think of all $ DICE/EA will save not having to pay for all them servers. They'll only have to pay for a few matchmaking/stats servers.

    Even if you're not a fan of RSP or don't like playing on private servers, you need to join this fight. I guarantee it won't be long until they take something away that you're in favor of. They keep taking, but not really offering anything.

    Nah, I think that's silly. CoD has been moving away from listen servers... Treyarch doesn't even use listen servers on the PC version of the game (with exception to Zombies / private matches / etc).

    Battlefield of all games would absolutely fail with listen servers, and even more so with P2P. We're talking about 32-64 players here.
  • Axlerod1
    1380 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    StingX71 wrote: »
    You all realize were one game away from CoD's Peer to Peer Hosting. Think of all $ DICE/EA will save not having to pay for all them servers. They'll only have to pay for a few matchmaking/stats servers.

    Even if you're not a fan of RSP or don't like playing on private servers, you need to join this fight. I guarantee it won't be long until they take something away that you're in favor of. They keep taking, but not really offering anything.

    Nah, I think that's silly. CoD has been moving away from listen servers... Treyarch doesn't even use listen servers on the PC version of the game (with exception to Zombies / private matches / etc).

    Battlefield of all games would absolutely fail with listen servers, and even more so with P2P. We're talking about 32-64 players here.

    And that is a huge reason most PC players do not support Cod anymore.
    Crash and I and several others have been talking about RSP for over 2 years now. We said over a year ago that is EA wanted to kill off communities and wanted to give a half attempt at RSP so when BFV launches, EA can they tried in before and it did not work.

    For those of you that bought the game expecting RSP...that is all your fault. You should have read instead of assuming EA would. If EA says something is in the game, then that means Ea will have it put in. Maybe not at launch but sometime soon. If EA does not talk about it, then that means it is not in the game and do not expect it.
  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Axlerod1 wrote: »
    All the games you mentioned were horrible in content and in game play and were very weak in the sales department. Rush (32 player was fun) and carrier assault both sucked in BF4 and no one played them.
    I had no problem finding populated servers which ran those modes. You're entitled to your opinion, but it means nothing to anyone but you, so don't claim you speak for large numbers of players.
  • A_Cool_Gorilla
    1374 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Axlerod1 wrote: »
    StingX71 wrote: »
    You all realize were one game away from CoD's Peer to Peer Hosting. Think of all $ DICE/EA will save not having to pay for all them servers. They'll only have to pay for a few matchmaking/stats servers.

    Even if you're not a fan of RSP or don't like playing on private servers, you need to join this fight. I guarantee it won't be long until they take something away that you're in favor of. They keep taking, but not really offering anything.

    Nah, I think that's silly. CoD has been moving away from listen servers... Treyarch doesn't even use listen servers on the PC version of the game (with exception to Zombies / private matches / etc).

    Battlefield of all games would absolutely fail with listen servers, and even more so with P2P. We're talking about 32-64 players here.

    And that is a huge reason most PC players do not support Cod anymore.
    Crash and I and several others have been talking about RSP for over 2 years now. We said over a year ago that is EA wanted to kill off communities and wanted to give a half attempt at RSP so when BFV launches, EA can they tried in before and it did not work.

    For those of you that bought the game expecting RSP...that is all your fault. You should have read instead of assuming EA would. If EA says something is in the game, then that means Ea will have it put in. Maybe not at launch but sometime soon. If EA does not talk about it, then that means it is not in the game and do not expect it.

    Maybe, but I don't believe it's a big factor.
  • happydemon
    25 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 28
    I posted this on the PC sub as well but in summary I don't see how EA can scoff at cost overages with rental servers when the whole point of such a feature is to grow the BFV ecosystem.

    Lots of FANGs (Amazon is a textbook example) accepted losses to maintain and grow their user bases. Tangible cash flow was the long-term result. It didn't happen overnight. Not every business decision is made to get easy money for one or two fiscal quarters.

    Rental & custom servers are one of many strategies to grow and maintain the player base. If EA wants to profit off of micro-transactions, you need players who stick around for longer than weeks or months. Few players = low micro-transaction profits. Period. See Counter-Strike Global Offensive as a prime example of how to grow and maintain a community while exposing users to micro-transactions.

    https://forums.battlefield.com/en-us/discussion/178660/custom-servers-are-a-necessity-to-grow-the-game
  • warslag
    1566 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    edited January 28
    There's no way you can generalise about who's playing what on PC. Gaming is changing all the time and unexpected things happen. Even since Christmas I've noticed a lot of young players on PC in Siege. Not that I think that's a good thing necessarily. But the situation is dynamic and you can't say what's around the corner or how the landscape is changing just by making a generalisation.
    Post edited by warslag on
  • -Antares65z
    1657 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    happydemon wrote: »
    I posted this on the PC sub as well but in summary I don't see how EA can scoff at cost overages with rental servers when the whole point of such a feature is to grow the BFV ecosystem.

    Lots of FANGs (Amazon is a textbook example) accepted losses to maintain and grow their user bases. Tangible cash flow was the long-term result. It didn't happen overnight. Not every business decision is made to get easy money for one or two fiscal quarters.

    Rental & custom servers are one of many strategies to grow and maintain the player base. If EA wants to profit off of micro-transactions, you need players who stick around for longer than weeks or months. Few players = low micro-transaction profits. Period. See Counter-Strike Global Offensive as a prime example of how to grow and maintain a community while exposing users to micro-transactions.

    https://forums.battlefield.com/en-us/discussion/178660/custom-servers-are-a-necessity-to-grow-the-game

    How much did the BF1 community benefit from the lackluster RSP that EA rolled out? Do you think EA made much money from it? I don't. How does the average/casual BF1 player join a server these days? Most have proven to use Quick Match, which BTW doesn't feed ANY traffic to rented servers. If EA were to provide an RSP TODAY, which would probably be just like the one for BF1, do you think that it would really help game sales? Rental servers won't mask the fact that BF5 is basically a train wreck. Most of today's players don't care about rented servers and using a server browser. Times have changed. For those of us who go back awhile, it was a really great and a fun ride with being able to set up and admin our own servers and making friends and establishing communities that carry on for years and years. I still talk and game with people I met 10-15 years ago. Some of these people turned into friends in real life.
  • Axlerod1
    1380 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    warslag wrote: »
    There's no way you can generalise about who's playing what on PC. Gaming is changing all the time and unexpected things happen. Even since Christmas I've noticed a lot of young players on PC in Siege. Not that I think that's a good thing necessarily. But the situation is dynamic and you can't say what's around the corner or how the landscape is changing just but making a generalisation.

    That is what EA and all the top companies do and spend billions on. They call it Market Research.
    I have shared some of EA's market research with this very thread in fact. I find it funny however EA chooses to ignore facts to try the 'New and Improved " gaming experience.

    Bottom line is this:
    You do not need a community for a game because EA does not want you to play the same game for more than 1 year. They actually prefer you to stop playing it after 6 months.
    You do not need RSP because EA has to pay people to develop it and you might like that game and want to play it for more than 6 months and not buy more of EA's games.


    https://www.barrons.com/articles/maybe-ea-should-delay-anthem-says-wall-street-analyst-51548696341

    Now everyone go buy ANTHEM. That is EA's next failure so go out and buy that game and support their shareholders. They need your money more than you need your money. You don't even have to play the game. Just buy it. It will be filled with lots of empty promises to get better, tons of toxic chat and don't forget all those cheaters they will support! Best of all, no admins to do anything about your complaints. Who wouldn't want to buy from a company with a track record like EA's. I am going to pre-order now!

    Why, because BFV is dead before it was released and you suckers bought it without reading anyones warnings. LOL Enjoy reading the forums now since you hate playing BFV. I hate say I told you so but I did for some time.
  • Axlerod1
    1380 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    If EA were to release RSP in a fashion that was on par with what 3rd party rentals servers had in BF1942, BF2, BF2142, BFBC2, BF3 and BF4 then yes it would have.

    FOR BFV, it is to little to late. It only works if it is available on launch and it all works. Now EA can not release a full game at launch. Half of it is coming "soon"!
    That is like buying a new car and you go to drive it off the dealerships lot and your salesman says as he is waving goodbye to you, "the transmission will get put in soon" Who would buy a car like that. Well if you bought BFV, then you would that is who.

    Side note : https://www.barrons.com/articles/maybe-ea-should-delay-anthem-says-wall-street-analyst-51548696341
    Get ready for another game filled with empty promises, toxic chat and loads of cheaters. It should have poor sales as well.
    Go pre-order it everyone. EA shareholders need you money.
  • happydemon
    25 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    How much did the BF1 community benefit from the lackluster RSP that EA rolled out? Do you think EA made much money from it? I don't. How does the average/casual BF1 player join a server these days? Most have proven to use Quick Match, which BTW doesn't feed ANY traffic to rented servers. If EA were to provide an RSP TODAY, which would probably be just like the one for BF1, do you think that it would really help game sales? Rental servers won't mask the fact that BF5 is basically a train wreck. Most of today's players don't care about rented servers and using a server browser. Times have changed. For those of us who go back awhile, it was a really great and a fun ride with being able to set up and admin our own servers and making friends and establishing communities that carry on for years and years. I still talk and game with people I met 10-15 years ago. Some of these people turned into friends in real life.

    I'm not sure if you read my post fully. If you did you'd know that I agree with you over 50%. This is not about "increasing sales." Rather, private and rented servers are about maintaining a player-base so as to increase cash flow from microtransactions. Yet another relevant suggested feature would be built-in clan support. You're also arguing against your own case by reminding that recent Battlefield games have had poor private/rented server support. We already know this. Nobody here for this functionality is asking for an afterthought of an implementation.

    With that said, again I mostly agree with you. There are many other pressing issues with BFV. I would rank anti-cheat mechanisms way above all the suggestions on this thread. Yet in the long-term EA will likely struggle to even come close to maximizing growth of microtransactions without focusing on social and community-oriented functionality.
  • Axlerod1
    1380 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Looks like sales wise, BFV just is not cutting the mustard.
    PS4 = 2,224,270
    Xbox = 1,547,325
    PC = N/A probably around 1,000,000
    total approx 5 million sold not counting refunds.

    http://www.vgchartz.com/yearly/2018/Global/
  • pebjesus
    197 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 29
    Axlerod1 wrote: »
    Looks like sales wise, BFV just is not cutting the mustard.
    PS4 = 2,224,270
    Xbox = 1,547,325
    PC = N/A probably around 1,000,000
    total approx 5 million sold not counting refunds.

    http://www.vgchartz.com/yearly/2018/Global/

    Isnt this quite a 'good' figure after all? (No sarcasm)


    Pat

    edit: even if the game would be sold 5M times for the discount price (35€) in germany, that would be like 175M.

  • A_Cool_Gorilla
    1374 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    pebjesus wrote: »
    Axlerod1 wrote: »
    Looks like sales wise, BFV just is not cutting the mustard.
    PS4 = 2,224,270
    Xbox = 1,547,325
    PC = N/A probably around 1,000,000
    total approx 5 million sold not counting refunds.

    http://www.vgchartz.com/yearly/2018/Global/

    Isnt this quite a 'good' figure after all? (No sarcasm)


    Pat

    edit: even if the game would be sold 5M times for the discount price (35€) in germany, that would be like 175M.

    I'd sure consider it good - really good considering it's poor marketing.
  • Red_Label_Scotch
    1233 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Axlerod1 wrote: »

    For those of you that bought the game expecting RSP...that is all your fault. You should have read instead of assuming EA would. If EA says something is in the game, then that means Ea will have it put in. Maybe not at launch but sometime soon. If EA does not talk about it, then that means it is not in the game and do not expect it.

    This, and it includes myself.

  • 0SiGHT0
    455 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    From a financial standpoint, EA/DICE have seen the amount of money generated by server rentals in their recent games. They know how much it costs to implement the feature. The amount doesn't make sense to them when their failure of a game is on it's last legs a mere few months after launch.

    EA isn't going to take their over 50% stock price decline lying down. Companies make big changes when things like this happen, and they are acting unsurprisingly and accordingly. It has become clear that they have pulled many resources and personnel from this title already and will continue to do so as they try to make another more successful title.

    While I argue and believe that server rentals or at the very least private matches are a staple necessity in an FPS like Battlefield, it makes sense why they are probably not going to include them. You can read in my blog in my signature where I discuss at length how to actually form a sustainable community in a competitively (not necessarily e-esports) based franchise like Battlefield. They had a very strong one, and have deteriorated it ever since the launch of BF4. Now it has almost dwindled away into very little, and by the time the next BF installment rolls around, there may be nothing left.
  • happydemon
    25 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    0SiGHT0 wrote: »
    From a financial standpoint, EA/DICE have seen the amount of money generated by server rentals in their recent games. They know how much it costs to implement the feature. The amount doesn't make sense to them when their failure of a game is on it's last legs a mere few months after launch.

    EA isn't going to take their over 50% stock price decline lying down. Companies make big changes when things like this happen, and they are acting unsurprisingly and accordingly. It has become clear that they have pulled many resources and personnel from this title already and will continue to do so as they try to make another more successful title.

    While I argue and believe that server rentals or at the very least private matches are a staple necessity in an FPS like Battlefield, it makes sense why they are probably not going to include them. You can read in my blog in my signature where I discuss at length how to actually form a sustainable community in a competitively (not necessarily e-esports) based franchise like Battlefield. They had a very strong one, and have deteriorated it ever since the launch of BF4. Now it has almost dwindled away into very little, and by the time the next BF installment rolls around, there may be nothing left.

    That is a fantastic and relevant blog post. I think this is particularly important:
    This is a strong contrast between competitive players, who continue playing their favorite title years later because of the community and ongoing support. For a game to retain its longevity, it needs to not only have an ample amount of casual players, but a strong, dedicated community of advocates. I was one of the players who played Battlefield only and no other game consistently, but since Battlefield 4 I have run out of reasons to continue putting in time online.

    I think the crux of the issue here is that DICE offers minimal social and community features in Battlefield. The features they do add are almost an afterthought. This flies in the face of a business model that intends to make continued cash off of micro-transactions. The hordes of casual gamers (many with deep pockets) will often just transition from shiny "AAA" game to shiny "AAA" game with little regard for spending $$$ on hats and skins. You have to build and maintain a community to profit off of micro-transactions n the long-term (see CS:GO) and DICE/EA seem to disregard this as irrelevant.

    With that said, my concern after reading your article is that it all boils down to EA being incompetent. You seem to carefully avoid taking this stance. With Bungie's departure from Activision, perhaps we will see DICE attempt something similar in separating from its parent. I'm not even going to pretend to believe this is new in 2019- we have known for DECADES that 95% of the time publishers are the reason games are delivered too soon or with poor open and closed beta tests. Their years may be limited and they know it. How EA chooses to react now will determine if they fracture or disintegrate in the next 5-10 years.
  • StingX71
    817 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member

    StingX71 wrote: »
    You all realize were one game away from CoD's Peer to Peer Hosting. Think of all $ DICE/EA will save not having to pay for all them servers. They'll only have to pay for a few matchmaking/stats servers.

    Even if you're not a fan of RSP or don't like playing on private servers, you need to join this fight. I guarantee it won't be long until they take something away that you're in favor of. They keep taking, but not really offering anything.

    Nah, I think that's silly. CoD has been moving away from listen servers... Treyarch doesn't even use listen servers on the PC version of the game (with exception to Zombies / private matches / etc).

    Battlefield of all games would absolutely fail with listen servers, and even more so with P2P. We're talking about 32-64 players here.

    CoD is all but dead on PC. Downfall started shortly after they went to Peer to peer. I know they use a hybrid type system now, but it's still garbage compared to the dedicated servers we use to have.

    I see the browser going away next with a big button in the middle of the screen saying, "Let us tell you how you want to play".
  • StingX71
    817 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    pebjesus wrote: »
    Axlerod1 wrote: »
    Looks like sales wise, BFV just is not cutting the mustard.
    PS4 = 2,224,270
    Xbox = 1,547,325
    PC = N/A probably around 1,000,000
    total approx 5 million sold not counting refunds.

    http://www.vgchartz.com/yearly/2018/Global/

    Isnt this quite a 'good' figure after all? (No sarcasm)


    Pat

    edit: even if the game would be sold 5M times for the discount price (35€) in germany, that would be like 175M.

    I recall 8 million players on WWII Xbox leader boards. Probably well over 10-12M on PS4. Don't think WWII was a barn burner in regard to sales. I know it's a bit apple to oranges, but still.
Sign In or Register to comment.