BF1 Servers - Thread for discussion of server rentals and settings*

Comments

  • ManDizzy
    6 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    RomeoZero1 wrote: »
    So that BF1 would again, like BF4, be owned by you - renters ? So we - customers , who bought a product to play and enjoy whenever we like, be owned by some imb rules you create ??? )))))
    It is a worldwide mulitplayer online game, if I "bought" the game to play online ,I should - as it is advertised!
    There might be no servers in my country but neighbor country with relative ping have one to enjoy smooth netcode, MM automatically can load that server. But if it belongs to a mentally unstable admin that bans me from playing the game ? What ,I need to get owned by " ping limit, Narcissistic personality disorder admin abuse or another continent 250+ping unplayable bs for (keyword) "my money" ? )))
    There are Consumer protection rights for a reason,I don't want to be cheated by a false advertisement.
    It should stay as SWBF3. Load game>connect> play>quit game.Simple as that.

    Guess what? DICE has been cheating every customer, including you, for the last 15+ years. You as a customer never had a guarantee] that you'll be able to play multiplayer online on ranked servers. The servers you and every other inconsiderate player have been enjoying for so many years were actually paid for by clans and/or individual players. If none of the players/clans had rented servers, you never would have been able to do as you suggested Load game>connect> play>quit game.Simple as that.. On the contrary, it has been anything but simple. DICE never ever provided official servers to play multiplay online for their customers. The only times they did was when testing game like in alpha or beta.

    Educate yourself and learn some facts before criticizing admins. Same admins who have been providing servers for everyone to enjoy and having to deal with people like you calling them all sorts of names without anything in return. If clans/individuals stopped renting servers today for bf3/4, let's see how you play and enjoy your game as advertised.

    BTW, I do believe there's good valid reasons on both sides. However, DICE already has options. DICE can provide their own hosted servers running "Official" mode and leave all non-official but ranked servers to clans/individuals to do with as they please. That would be a win/win situation for everyone but DICE is just too brain dead to realize it.

  • Madturnip
    415 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    THIS IS HOW TO REMEDY THIS ISSUE:

    If you want to get someone's attention we need more meat for the grinder. I have read quite a few community leaders, clan admins, etc chime in about this topic. Get all your membership to make this thread 700+ pages long. Then and only then will we get an answer when there is no doubt people want to know. Until we can get more passion to this question all in one place it is going to fall on deaf ears.
  • vtrocker420
    1 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    So what's status on this ? No info .. we the people who support ur games have the right to know.. before oct.. makes a big difference in people prefer ordering or not I am sure... listen to the people please and thanks
  • llll-Rogue-llll
    66 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    There is no remedy to change DICE/EA plans, We did that years ago to Infinity Ward at the end of COD4, when they was stopping the dedicated servers going to the matchmaking system. there was an online petition that had thousends of ppl sign, it made not one lil bit of differance but every cod after that had a short life span, the stats are there for all to see !
    We are at the point now of just wanting to know, simple as that so we can move on!

  • BEASTUMOFO
    16 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Vote with your money, thats the only customer they listen to.
  • Madturnip
    415 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    There is no remedy to change DICE/EA plans, We did that years ago to Infinity Ward at the end of COD4, when they was stopping the dedicated servers going to the matchmaking system. there was an online petition that had thousends of ppl sign, it made not one lil bit of differance but every cod after that had a short life span, the stats are there for all to see !
    We are at the point now of just wanting to know, simple as that so we can move on!

    I disagree.. That is the remedy in and of itself. If they fail to respond to massive amounts of people asking then it is clear that you are correct and they do not care about what PC communities, players, and clans want. They could care less about the community in general and more about profits and pre-orders. This will give everyone the FOR SURE answer they need to do just that --- move on.
  • BEASTUMOFO
    16 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    So spend the money on the pre-order and then let *** you?? They have already proven they dont care by the amt of hackers in the game that they refuse to deal with and the fact that they have already taken away many procon privledges that we have had in the past. Once they have your money..its all over. Look at Hardline, that game failed so fast because people didnt buy it in revolt of their practices with BF4, they had to practically give it away to get people too play it.
  • Madturnip
    415 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited September 2016
    BEASTUMOFO wrote: »
    So spend the money on the pre-order and then let *** you?? They have already proven they dont care by the amt of hackers in the game that they refuse to deal with and the fact that they have already taken away many procon privileges that we have had in the past. Once they have your money..its all over. Look at Hardline, that game failed so fast because people didnt buy it in revolt of their practices with BF4, they had to practically give it away to get people too play it.

    I am not disagreeing with you. In-Fact, if you re-read what I typed I think it suggests that I violently agree with you. However, COD is not in my vocabulary so quoting me things from a franchise I hate isn't presenting facts about BF and EA/DICE. OOPS-- wrong person! I love the Battlefield series and all the memories I have made in the gaming community I have run for 15 years devoted to Battlefield. I have stated that I will refund my money if no word is given one way or the other on this topic. I have seen the trend as well -- taking away admin rights -- and basically making servers almost impossible to populate unless you run OFFICIAL settings. However, none of that is relevant to getting an answer to the question at hand.

    Forced pressure does work on DICE as it has been proven too in the past. Massive amount of 12 year olds screaming about NET CODE and FIX THE GAME, people crying about weapon stats and JET's / Helicopters dying too fast. All these things were brought up in the Battlelog forums over -- and over -- and finally got a response. So DICE, and not necessarily EA, does care enough to respond a majority of the time. However, it takes massive amount of response to get their attention and just writing it off as the gospel is the worst idea I have heard yet. So unless you are employed at EA or DICE Studios I don't think you have a magic 8-ball that tells you the thoughts of developers.

    I do agree that this waiting and waiting... and waiting.... with no word is troublesome. I also will get my money back prior to launch if no word is given if I have to file a fraudulent credit card claim to do so. I don't want to do this, but my community and the people I have played Battlefield titles with over the past 14 to 15 years rely on dedicated servers and live admins. If we don't have them then we must look for alternative games to play.
  • SirBobdk
    4548 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited September 2016
    Red orchestra. Vietnam early 2017
  • Madturnip
    415 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    SirBobdk wrote: »
    Red orchestra. Vietnam

    Looks like a great game, but I still want my BF.
  • BEASTUMOFO
    16 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Turnip..just make sure you cancel before launch, otherwise your screwed. It would be wise to cancel today. You can always re-order if they come to their senses
  • SirBobdk
    4548 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Madturnip wrote: »
    SirBobdk wrote: »
    Red orchestra. Vietnam

    Looks like a great game, but I still want my BF.

    So do i if dice can get it right.
  • VonStiffy
    91 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    RomeoZero1 wrote: »
    So that BF1 would again, like BF4, be owned by you - renters ? So we - customers , who bought a product to play and enjoy whenever we like, be owned by some imb rules you create ???
    It is a worldwide mulitplayer online game, if I "bought" the game to play online ,I should - as it is advertised!

    Guess what? . The servers you and every other inconsiderate player have been enjoying for so many years were actually paid for by clans and/or individual players. If none of the players/clans had rented servers, you never would have been able to do as you suggested.

    Educate yourself and learn some facts before criticizing admins. Same admins having to deal with people like you calling them all sorts of names without anything in return. If clans/individuals stopped renting servers today for bf3/4, let's see how you play and enjoy your game as advertised.

    could have just ignored the idiot


  • S1ngular1ty
    801 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    Madturnip wrote: »
    THIS IS HOW TO REMEDY THIS ISSUE:

    If you want to get someone's attention we need more meat for the grinder. I have read quite a few community leaders, clan admins, etc chime in about this topic. Get all your membership to make this thread 700+ pages long. Then and only then will we get an answer when there is no doubt people want to know. Until we can get more passion to this question all in one place it is going to fall on deaf ears.


    I feel your pain. The answer is obvious though. There won't be dedicated servers for BF1 like we had for BF3 and BF4. They will be EA and DICE controlled mostly or you can rent from EA without full access to the server. They will run on VMs like Microsoft Azure or Amazon AWS. They will be locked down with little customization possible.
    .
    The people from Procon have basically given up with BF1 already because they see the writing on the wall. Most of the active people on those forums don't expect any rcon support for BF1 which means no Procon, no anti-cheat streaming like PBBANS, and no customization.
    .
    Enjoy the new BF reality of dumbed down player experience and dumbed down server infrastructure.
  • FlankerMTL
    264 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I made a separate thread about this, but figured I would post here also since it's getting much more attention than my thread.

    If DICE/EA doesn't allow people to run their own servers like they did in BF2/BF3/BF4 ect.. then I wont be buying this game. I'm glad I waited to pre-order. I hope DICE/EA are watching, they better make the right choice. I mean FFS they're already making bank like there's no tomorrow, having dedicated servers won't hurt their bottom line, it will help it! Just look at all the people saying they wont buy unless they have dedicated servers.

  • Rev0verDrive
    6760 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    I feel your pain. The answer is obvious though. There won't be dedicated servers for BF1 like we had for BF3 and BF4. They will be EA and DICE controlled mostly or you can rent from EA without full access to the server. They will run on VMs like Microsoft Azure or Amazon AWS.

    Facts
    There will be dedicated servers. If EA takes GSP control and rents servers they will not be on VM's. Why would they?
    • VM's eat more resources
    • Clients (renters) "never" have access to BF servers files in the first place. So why use even bother with a vm? just use the base OS to remote admin.
    • Updating server files (patches) takes longer on a VM setup (1 per machine vs 1 foreach vm on each machine).
    They will be locked down with little customization possible.
    Have you even looked at the server browser info for a server? There's 26 customization options listed as of Beta. From No shotguns, No explosives to outright No medic, scout, assault, support etc. InFACT the Kits/Vehicles options doesn't have the vehicles listed ... which there will be on release. Otherwise why does it say Kits/VEHICLES?
    The people from Procon have basically given up with BF1 already because they see the writing on the wall. Most of the active people on those forums don't expect any rcon support for BF1 which means no Procon, no anti-cheat streaming like PBBANS, and no customization.

    You know very well that Phogue (Procon Developer) was hired by DICE. Why would DICE hire an RCON expert? One of the reasons (which you already know but elude to post about) is to fix "Customization". e.g. the class limiter plugin. It's an outright "Hack" that penalizes a player for using a ui "selectable" weapon. The fix is to fully enable this feature directly into the game. So when you goto a no scout server you can't select scout. DICE wants you to know that you are on a "custom" server.

    Phogue being an RCON expert may also mean DICE is creating their very own proprietary Rcon utility.

    Stop taking a **** because DICE didn't make 2143. Hating on everything and being a fear monger. It's ridiculous and outright sad.
  • S1ngular1ty
    801 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    edited September 2016
    I bet you there won't be rcon support, you have to rent all servers directly from DICE/EA, and they will run on VMs in Amazon AWS and Microsoft Azure. This is why we haven't heard anything about servers through official channels. It is all bad news.
    .
    The servers in the Beta were on Amazon AWS and there have been reports of what I'm saying from people who asked their GSPs about servers for BF1.
  • Rev0verDrive
    6760 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    I bet you there won't be rcon support, you have to rent all servers directly from DICE/EA, and they will run on VMs in Amazon AWS and Microsoft Azure. This is why we haven't heard anything about servers through official channels. It is all bad news.

    Just because a server is hosted through Amazon or Microsoft doesn't mean it'll be VPS. That's absurd.

    Maybe we haven't heard anything yet because everything isn't finished. You don't dump a buttload of info out and then change it. Especially on a topic so touchy. When you finalize, then you announce.
  • S1ngular1ty
    801 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    edited September 2016
    I bet you there won't be rcon support, you have to rent all servers directly from DICE/EA, and they will run on VMs in Amazon AWS and Microsoft Azure. This is why we haven't heard anything about servers through official channels. It is all bad news.

    Just because a server is hosted through Amazon or Microsoft doesn't mean it'll be VPS. That's absurd.

    Maybe we haven't heard anything yet because everything isn't finished. You don't dump a buttload of info out and then change it. Especially on a topic so touchy. When you finalize, then you announce.


    Microsoft Azure and Amazon AWS only offer virtual machines. There is proof that Amazon AWS was used for the beta. It is likely that the reason we haven't heard anything about servers is because the news is bad.
  • ManDizzy
    6 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    • Updating server files (patches) takes longer on a VM setup (1 per machine vs 1 foreach vm on each machine).

    You have no idea how VM farms work and your above statement is proof of it. Don't state it as a fact when you're clueless about facts.

    For the record, VMs are infinitely easier to patch/upgrade than physical servers, hence their explosive growth on Internet. If done correctly, all you have to patch is a single gold master image and you can literally roll out the patch to thousands and thousands of VM servers. That's how far things have advanced in VM farm technology.

This discussion has been closed.