Hit Detection

Comments

  • mmarkweII
    2919 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Mearen1911 wrote:
    I'm talking about him claiming something that happens every day never happens. Go back and read his posts. Your comprehension needs work.

    What has he claimed doesn't happen, yet you see every day?

    Maybe an explanation cross up.

    Or video. If it happens all of the time, it should be pretty easy to capture and post.
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited September 2017
    oJU5T1No wrote: »

    DICE recognizes that a large portion of the audience has poor connections, due to the backlash of the initial 100ms cap, there isn't much chance of DICE clamping down on poor connections again. This is unfortunate as there are tangible issues regarding player desync still in the live client, that doesn't mean things are being ignored.

    You blame all of the netcode problems of the last three games on one dev, I'd love to see the factual evidence you have to back up that opinion, from my perspective, it seems like a purely negative assumption.

    A large portion of the player who won't accept the physics of the internet and thinks its much fairer everyone else suffers the effects of there poor connection rather than them.

    It's kinda messed up to give those players an awesome experience, then take it away.

    I hate it too, but it's the reality. You can't pull the rug out from people a year in, it's unfortunate that the 100ms soft cap was bugged with no ping relevant extrapolation to even things out.

    Because of a bug, we are stuck with 160ms/200ms. It is what it is, I will be very harsh with my network feedback for the next game, and for incursions, but the public servers don't seem like they will become any less high ping friendly, even with continued optimization and a main focus on low ping play.

    At least we are making progress, bf4 was revolting in this department, and DICE lied about things over and over, I haven't forgotten.
  • iSpyRecon
    770 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited September 2017
    iSpyRecon wrote: »
    Fast Questions:
    1. Is there still a cap?
    2. What is the ms level?
    3. What happens when a player(s) exceed this cap?

    Thank you,

    Yes, there is a ping threshold cap.

    US and Europe: 160ms
    All other Regions: 200ms

    Unlike below threshold where the client deems a hit and sends a claim to the server for server arbitration. Those that exceed the threshold have all shots fired arbitrated strictly by the server. Hit or miss every shot is scrutinized by the server.

    Additionally shots fired and lost via packet loss are not resent by the client...for those with high latency and/or variance (jitter). Also late arrival of shots and extremely delayed client -> server data are discarded... again for high latency players. Furthermore when a player's client data is not received in a timely manner or at all, the server will extrapolate positional information about the player and bind it to the gamestate history.

    Always the best on the subject!
    Thank you, Rev.
  • denjoga
    607 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    It's kinda messed up to give those players an awesome experience, then take it away.

    I hate it too, but it's the reality. You can't pull the rug out from people a year in, it's unfortunate that the 100ms soft cap was bugged with no ping relevant extrapolation to even things out.

    Because of a bug, we are stuck with 160ms/200ms. It is what it is, I will be very harsh with my network feedback for the next game, and for incursions, but the public servers don't seem like they will become any less high ping friendly, even with continued optimization and a main focus on low ping play.

    At least we are making progress, bf4 was revolting in this department, and DICE lied about things over and over, I haven't forgotten.
    But you're still going to buy the next game?
    I'm so done with DICE.
    BF3, BF4, BFH, SWBF, BF1... how many times does one have to be let down and have their hopes dashed before realizing that DICE are just not good at what they do?
    I have zero interest in SWBF2 - the original SWBFs are IMO still the best multiplayer shooters I've ever played and when I heard DICE was doing the reboot, I was bummed - I knew they'd screw it up and they certainly did.
    IF they announce that the next Battlefield title will be built from the ground up on a new engine, I'll pay attention and allow myself some hope that they'll get it right, but otherwise it's no DICE for me.
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    denjoga wrote: »
    It's kinda messed up to give those players an awesome experience, then take it away.

    I hate it too, but it's the reality. You can't pull the rug out from people a year in, it's unfortunate that the 100ms soft cap was bugged with no ping relevant extrapolation to even things out.

    Because of a bug, we are stuck with 160ms/200ms. It is what it is, I will be very harsh with my network feedback for the next game, and for incursions, but the public servers don't seem like they will become any less high ping friendly, even with continued optimization and a main focus on low ping play.

    At least we are making progress, bf4 was revolting in this department, and DICE lied about things over and over, I haven't forgotten.
    But you're still going to buy the next game?
    I'm so done with DICE.
    BF3, BF4, BFH, SWBF, BF1... how many times does one have to be let down and have their hopes dashed before realizing that DICE are just not good at what they do?
    I have zero interest in SWBF2 - the original SWBFs are IMO still the best multiplayer shooters I've ever played and when I heard DICE was doing the reboot, I was bummed - I knew they'd screw it up and they certainly did.
    IF they announce that the next Battlefield title will be built from the ground up on a new engine, I'll pay attention and allow myself some hope that they'll get it right, but otherwise it's no DICE for me.

    I'm sure they really care about individuals making a stand.

    I can make a difference by participating, voting with my wallet would mean changes would happen with one less informed opinion.

    I like bf, that's why I'm still here. Pretty simple.
  • HillbillyJohn
    493 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    denjoga wrote: »
    It's kinda messed up to give those players an awesome experience, then take it away.

    I hate it too, but it's the reality. You can't pull the rug out from people a year in, it's unfortunate that the 100ms soft cap was bugged with no ping relevant extrapolation to even things out.

    Because of a bug, we are stuck with 160ms/200ms. It is what it is, I will be very harsh with my network feedback for the next game, and for incursions, but the public servers don't seem like they will become any less high ping friendly, even with continued optimization and a main focus on low ping play.

    At least we are making progress, bf4 was revolting in this department, and DICE lied about things over and over, I haven't forgotten.
    But you're still going to buy the next game?
    I'm so done with DICE.
    BF3, BF4, BFH, SWBF, BF1... how many times does one have to be let down and have their hopes dashed before realizing that DICE are just not good at what they do?
    I have zero interest in SWBF2 - the original SWBFs are IMO still the best multiplayer shooters I've ever played and when I heard DICE was doing the reboot, I was bummed - I knew they'd screw it up and they certainly did.
    IF they announce that the next Battlefield title will be built from the ground up on a new engine, I'll pay attention and allow myself some hope that they'll get it right, but otherwise it's no DICE for me.

    I'm sure they really care about individuals making a stand.

    I can make a difference by participating, voting with my wallet would mean changes would happen with one less informed opinion.

    I like bf, that's why I'm still here. Pretty simple.

    They should care, it starts with one.
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    denjoga wrote: »
    It's kinda messed up to give those players an awesome experience, then take it away.

    I hate it too, but it's the reality. You can't pull the rug out from people a year in, it's unfortunate that the 100ms soft cap was bugged with no ping relevant extrapolation to even things out.

    Because of a bug, we are stuck with 160ms/200ms. It is what it is, I will be very harsh with my network feedback for the next game, and for incursions, but the public servers don't seem like they will become any less high ping friendly, even with continued optimization and a main focus on low ping play.

    At least we are making progress, bf4 was revolting in this department, and DICE lied about things over and over, I haven't forgotten.
    But you're still going to buy the next game?
    I'm so done with DICE.
    BF3, BF4, BFH, SWBF, BF1... how many times does one have to be let down and have their hopes dashed before realizing that DICE are just not good at what they do?
    I have zero interest in SWBF2 - the original SWBFs are IMO still the best multiplayer shooters I've ever played and when I heard DICE was doing the reboot, I was bummed - I knew they'd screw it up and they certainly did.
    IF they announce that the next Battlefield title will be built from the ground up on a new engine, I'll pay attention and allow myself some hope that they'll get it right, but otherwise it's no DICE for me.

    I'm sure they really care about individuals making a stand.

    I can make a difference by participating, voting with my wallet would mean changes would happen with one less informed opinion.

    I like bf, that's why I'm still here. Pretty simple.

    They should care, it starts with one.

    Have fun with your strike.
  • HillbillyJohn
    493 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    denjoga wrote: »
    It's kinda messed up to give those players an awesome experience, then take it away.

    I hate it too, but it's the reality. You can't pull the rug out from people a year in, it's unfortunate that the 100ms soft cap was bugged with no ping relevant extrapolation to even things out.

    Because of a bug, we are stuck with 160ms/200ms. It is what it is, I will be very harsh with my network feedback for the next game, and for incursions, but the public servers don't seem like they will become any less high ping friendly, even with continued optimization and a main focus on low ping play.

    At least we are making progress, bf4 was revolting in this department, and DICE lied about things over and over, I haven't forgotten.
    But you're still going to buy the next game?
    I'm so done with DICE.
    BF3, BF4, BFH, SWBF, BF1... how many times does one have to be let down and have their hopes dashed before realizing that DICE are just not good at what they do?
    I have zero interest in SWBF2 - the original SWBFs are IMO still the best multiplayer shooters I've ever played and when I heard DICE was doing the reboot, I was bummed - I knew they'd screw it up and they certainly did.
    IF they announce that the next Battlefield title will be built from the ground up on a new engine, I'll pay attention and allow myself some hope that they'll get it right, but otherwise it's no DICE for me.

    I'm sure they really care about individuals making a stand.

    I can make a difference by participating, voting with my wallet would mean changes would happen with one less informed opinion.

    I like bf, that's why I'm still here. Pretty simple.

    They should care, it starts with one.

    Have fun with your strike.

    I will, I buy all their games pre-owned. :)
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    denjoga wrote: »
    It's kinda messed up to give those players an awesome experience, then take it away.

    I hate it too, but it's the reality. You can't pull the rug out from people a year in, it's unfortunate that the 100ms soft cap was bugged with no ping relevant extrapolation to even things out.

    Because of a bug, we are stuck with 160ms/200ms. It is what it is, I will be very harsh with my network feedback for the next game, and for incursions, but the public servers don't seem like they will become any less high ping friendly, even with continued optimization and a main focus on low ping play.

    At least we are making progress, bf4 was revolting in this department, and DICE lied about things over and over, I haven't forgotten.
    But you're still going to buy the next game?
    I'm so done with DICE.
    BF3, BF4, BFH, SWBF, BF1... how many times does one have to be let down and have their hopes dashed before realizing that DICE are just not good at what they do?
    I have zero interest in SWBF2 - the original SWBFs are IMO still the best multiplayer shooters I've ever played and when I heard DICE was doing the reboot, I was bummed - I knew they'd screw it up and they certainly did.
    IF they announce that the next Battlefield title will be built from the ground up on a new engine, I'll pay attention and allow myself some hope that they'll get it right, but otherwise it's no DICE for me.

    I'm sure they really care about individuals making a stand.

    I can make a difference by participating, voting with my wallet would mean changes would happen with one less informed opinion.

    I like bf, that's why I'm still here. Pretty simple.

    They should care, it starts with one.

    Have fun with your strike.

    I will, I buy all their games pre-owned. :)

    Lol, that's funny. I would... but I'm kinda hooked on digital.
  • HillbillyJohn
    493 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    denjoga wrote: »
    It's kinda messed up to give those players an awesome experience, then take it away.

    I hate it too, but it's the reality. You can't pull the rug out from people a year in, it's unfortunate that the 100ms soft cap was bugged with no ping relevant extrapolation to even things out.

    Because of a bug, we are stuck with 160ms/200ms. It is what it is, I will be very harsh with my network feedback for the next game, and for incursions, but the public servers don't seem like they will become any less high ping friendly, even with continued optimization and a main focus on low ping play.

    At least we are making progress, bf4 was revolting in this department, and DICE lied about things over and over, I haven't forgotten.
    But you're still going to buy the next game?
    I'm so done with DICE.
    BF3, BF4, BFH, SWBF, BF1... how many times does one have to be let down and have their hopes dashed before realizing that DICE are just not good at what they do?
    I have zero interest in SWBF2 - the original SWBFs are IMO still the best multiplayer shooters I've ever played and when I heard DICE was doing the reboot, I was bummed - I knew they'd screw it up and they certainly did.
    IF they announce that the next Battlefield title will be built from the ground up on a new engine, I'll pay attention and allow myself some hope that they'll get it right, but otherwise it's no DICE for me.

    I'm sure they really care about individuals making a stand.

    I can make a difference by participating, voting with my wallet would mean changes would happen with one less informed opinion.

    I like bf, that's why I'm still here. Pretty simple.

    They should care, it starts with one.

    Have fun with your strike.

    I will, I buy all their games pre-owned. :)

    Lol, that's funny. I would... but I'm kinda hooked on digital.

    I like digital too but in this case buying disc has it's benefits, at least in my view. Now if EA/Dice could get it together I would be more than happy to give them money for their products. I have three gaming platforms and several friends on each (xbox ps4 and pc) and in the past would buy Battlefield for all three, so that's a bit of money from one customer.
  • Godhates1234
    412 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    denjoga wrote: »
    It's kinda messed up to give those players an awesome experience, then take it away.

    I hate it too, but it's the reality. You can't pull the rug out from people a year in, it's unfortunate that the 100ms soft cap was bugged with no ping relevant extrapolation to even things out.

    Because of a bug, we are stuck with 160ms/200ms. It is what it is, I will be very harsh with my network feedback for the next game, and for incursions, but the public servers don't seem like they will become any less high ping friendly, even with continued optimization and a main focus on low ping play.

    At least we are making progress, bf4 was revolting in this department, and DICE lied about things over and over, I haven't forgotten.
    But you're still going to buy the next game?
    I'm so done with DICE.
    BF3, BF4, BFH, SWBF, BF1... how many times does one have to be let down and have their hopes dashed before realizing that DICE are just not good at what they do?
    I have zero interest in SWBF2 - the original SWBFs are IMO still the best multiplayer shooters I've ever played and when I heard DICE was doing the reboot, I was bummed - I knew they'd screw it up and they certainly did.
    IF they announce that the next Battlefield title will be built from the ground up on a new engine, I'll pay attention and allow myself some hope that they'll get it right, but otherwise it's no DICE for me.

    I'm sure they really care about individuals making a stand.

    I can make a difference by participating, voting with my wallet would mean changes would happen with one less informed opinion.

    I like bf, that's why I'm still here. Pretty simple.

    They should care, it starts with one.

    Have fun with your strike.

    I will, I buy all their games pre-owned. :)

    Lol, that's funny. I would... but I'm kinda hooked on digital.

    I like digital too but in this case buying disc has it's benefits, at least in my view. Now if EA/Dice could get it together I would be more than happy to give them money for their products. I have three gaming platforms and several friends on each (xbox ps4 and pc) and in the past would buy Battlefield for all three, so that's a bit of money from one customer.

    They would love to take your money. And you will still have a hard time with there bugs, issues, netcode,hitdetection and they will laugh all the way too the bank.
  • misisipiRivrRat
    807 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    denjoga wrote: »
    It's kinda messed up to give those players an awesome experience, then take it away.

    I hate it too, but it's the reality. You can't pull the rug out from people a year in, it's unfortunate that the 100ms soft cap was bugged with no ping relevant extrapolation to even things out.

    Because of a bug, we are stuck with 160ms/200ms. It is what it is, I will be very harsh with my network feedback for the next game, and for incursions, but the public servers don't seem like they will become any less high ping friendly, even with continued optimization and a main focus on low ping play.

    At least we are making progress, bf4 was revolting in this department, and DICE lied about things over and over, I haven't forgotten.
    But you're still going to buy the next game?
    I'm so done with DICE.
    BF3, BF4, BFH, SWBF, BF1... how many times does one have to be let down and have their hopes dashed before realizing that DICE are just not good at what they do?
    I have zero interest in SWBF2 - the original SWBFs are IMO still the best multiplayer shooters I've ever played and when I heard DICE was doing the reboot, I was bummed - I knew they'd screw it up and they certainly did.
    IF they announce that the next Battlefield title will be built from the ground up on a new engine, I'll pay attention and allow myself some hope that they'll get it right, but otherwise it's no DICE for me.

    I'm sure they really care about individuals making a stand.

    I can make a difference by participating, voting with my wallet would mean changes would happen with one less informed opinion.

    I like bf, that's why I'm still here. Pretty simple.

    They should care, it starts with one.
    denjoga wrote: »
    It's kinda messed up to give those players an awesome experience, then take it away.

    I hate it too, but it's the reality. You can't pull the rug out from people a year in, it's unfortunate that the 100ms soft cap was bugged with no ping relevant extrapolation to even things out.

    Because of a bug, we are stuck with 160ms/200ms. It is what it is, I will be very harsh with my network feedback for the next game, and for incursions, but the public servers don't seem like they will become any less high ping friendly, even with continued optimization and a main focus on low ping play.

    At least we are making progress, bf4 was revolting in this department, and DICE lied about things over and over, I haven't forgotten.
    But you're still going to buy the next game?
    I'm so done with DICE.
    BF3, BF4, BFH, SWBF, BF1... how many times does one have to be let down and have their hopes dashed before realizing that DICE are just not good at what they do?
    I have zero interest in SWBF2 - the original SWBFs are IMO still the best multiplayer shooters I've ever played and when I heard DICE was doing the reboot, I was bummed - I knew they'd screw it up and they certainly did.
    IF they announce that the next Battlefield title will be built from the ground up on a new engine, I'll pay attention and allow myself some hope that they'll get it right, but otherwise it's no DICE for me.

    I'm sure they really care about individuals making a stand.

    I can make a difference by participating, voting with my wallet would mean changes would happen with one less informed opinion.

    I like bf, that's why I'm still here. Pretty simple.

    They should care, it starts with one.

    Voting with your wallet does work but you need the people that buy the game to stop buying it and that probably won't happen.
    But remember a few years back when the masses gave Microsoft a big F you by not pre-ordering the xboxone? Well MS changed their policies pretty damn quick when they saw those numbers. It could work if enough people worked together.We as consumers hold the power most just don't care.
  • denjoga
    607 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I'm sure they really care about individuals making a stand.

    I can make a difference by participating, voting with my wallet would mean changes would happen with one less informed opinion.

    I like bf, that's why I'm still here. Pretty simple.

    It's not about sending them a message, it's about me not wanting to buy yet another disappointing, defective product.

    I like bf too, when it works right - I'm still here because I had hope that they'd be able to fix what has been broken since BF3.

    Had a ton of fun w/ BC2. Same w/ BF3; put tons of hours into it w/ lots of friends, full rental servers, premium, etc. - but it began the trend of getting more and more broken as it aged and each dlc and/or patch breaking 10 things for each one that got fixed. BF3 started out great and eventually became completely unplayable.

    BF4 was a disgrace right out of the gate. How does a AAA developer release a new title that carries over all the worst problems from the previous title and add even more?!?
    I didn't buy premium and eventually quit and moved on to a completely different game.
    Then last fall, they made all the DLC available for $20, so I bought it and played for maybe a few weeks before realizing it was still too broken to be any fun at all.

    BF1 was an improvement in terms of netcode, but just like the titles before it, it has only gone down hill since launch.

    While playing the other night, and dealing with all the same old wtf-ery, I sighed and said, "this game sucks", and realized that it was true. At least a couple of my platoon mates agreed with me.
    BF3 was fun enough that it was worth tolerating the slop, until the slop grew to outweigh the fun and became intolerable.
    BF1, for me, is just not that fun. The stripped down WWI setting was a nice change of pace at first, but now I just find it boring.

    Why I continue to play would be a long explanation, suffice it to say that I have nothing better to do/play.
    I'm looking for something else.

    People have suggested that the core problems lie with the Frostbite engine, which makes sense considering all the problems that have persisted over all 4 titles on that engine (5 counting SWBF).
    If that's the case, it would be unreasonable to expect BFNext to be any better if they stick w/ Frostbite.

    I know plenty of people who have no problem buying every new game that comes out and it doesn't bother them when 9/10 end up being a waste of money, but I can't afford to do that - I buy/play one game at a time.
    I like the concept and style of BF games, but the execution is not worthy of a full priced, AAA title.
  • rock1obsta
    3797 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    denjoga wrote: »
    I'm sure they really care about individuals making a stand.

    I can make a difference by participating, voting with my wallet would mean changes would happen with one less informed opinion.

    I like bf, that's why I'm still here. Pretty simple.

    It's not about sending them a message, it's about me not wanting to buy yet another disappointing, defective product.

    I like bf too, when it works right - I'm still here because I had hope that they'd be able to fix what has been broken since BF3.

    Had a ton of fun w/ BC2. Same w/ BF3; put tons of hours into it w/ lots of friends, full rental servers, premium, etc. - but it began the trend of getting more and more broken as it aged and each dlc and/or patch breaking 10 things for each one that got fixed. BF3 started out great and eventually became completely unplayable.

    BF4 was a disgrace right out of the gate. How does a AAA developer release a new title that carries over all the worst problems from the previous title and add even more?!?
    I didn't buy premium and eventually quit and moved on to a completely different game.
    Then last fall, they made all the DLC available for $20, so I bought it and played for maybe a few weeks before realizing it was still too broken to be any fun at all.

    BF1 was an improvement in terms of netcode, but just like the titles before it, it has only gone down hill since launch.

    While playing the other night, and dealing with all the same old wtf-ery, I sighed and said, "this game sucks", and realized that it was true. At least a couple of my platoon mates agreed with me.
    BF3 was fun enough that it was worth tolerating the slop, until the slop grew to outweigh the fun and became intolerable.
    BF1, for me, is just not that fun. The stripped down WWI setting was a nice change of pace at first, but now I just find it boring.

    Why I continue to play would be a long explanation, suffice it to say that I have nothing better to do/play.
    I'm looking for something else.

    People have suggested that the core problems lie with the Frostbite engine, which makes sense considering all the problems that have persisted over all 4 titles on that engine (5 counting SWBF).
    If that's the case, it would be unreasonable to expect BFNext to be any better if they stick w/ Frostbite.

    I know plenty of people who have no problem buying every new game that comes out and it doesn't bother them when 9/10 end up being a waste of money, but I can't afford to do that - I buy/play one game at a time.
    I like the concept and style of BF games, but the execution is not worthy of a full priced, AAA title.

    Dude, I gave up on BF1 weeks ago, and went back to 3 because of backwards compatibility, and man oh man, it's a straight up blast.

    It's just as awesome as it was back in the day, and surprisingly few wtf moments.

    Not to mention you can find a full game at any time of the day.

    Good times
  • denjoga
    607 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    rock1obsta wrote: »
    Dude, I gave up on BF1 weeks ago, and went back to 3 because of backwards compatibility, and man oh man, it's a straight up blast.

    It's just as awesome as it was back in the day, and surprisingly few wtf moments.

    Not to mention you can find a full game at any time of the day.

    Good times

    I'm on PS4, no backwards compatibility. It's too bad, I'd love to give BF3 another shot.
    Last time I tried BF4, I played like 2 matches and then said, "yeah, eff this."
  • HillbillyJohn
    493 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    denjoga wrote: »
    rock1obsta wrote: »
    Dude, I gave up on BF1 weeks ago, and went back to 3 because of backwards compatibility, and man oh man, it's a straight up blast.

    It's just as awesome as it was back in the day, and surprisingly few wtf moments.

    Not to mention you can find a full game at any time of the day.

    Good times

    I'm on PS4, no backwards compatibility. It's too bad, I'd love to give BF3 another shot.
    Last time I tried BF4, I played like 2 matches and then said, "yeah, eff this."

    I have Bf3 on xbox , I'll have to give it a try. I also have bc2 on it and it's still pretty easy to find games. Hit detection was better in bc2 than bf1 last time I played which was a month or so ago.
  • Mearen1911
    115 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Mearen1911 wrote: »
    Mearen1911 wrote: »
    lizzard wrote: »
    lizzard wrote: »

    Please king.. Stop this nonsense...

    A hitreg bug, would be something specific to a given instance.

    Switching guns while reloading. And then have no hitreg.

    Enter vehicle as a class and then exit vehicle, and have no hitreg.

    Something like the previous hitreg bug that made some players unable to hit any one without restarting the game for example!

    General hitreg would be that you sometime doesn't get a hit on someone.
    Maybe one hit isn't counted out of 5 hits.

    Drop that "crazy hostility" you've got going..

    I'm not going to play semantics with you, and I'm not going to allow semantics to dismiss the feedback of myself and others, you're literally making nonsense claims. Bugs, issues, problems.... WHO CARES? These terms are not the point.

    I'm also not the one declaring that the dev has no reason to further interact.

    It seems you have dismissed the idea of legit hit-reg bugs and are now blaming supression and spread, I'm not going to follow a narrative simply out of ease.

    If you don't think the netcode, or legit bugs are to blame, thats totally fine, not a problem, what we don't need is you dismissing feedback.

    Im not dismissing feedback!
    I'm not saying there is no hitreg issues!

    I do doubt that mischkag can do much more, under the circumstances!

    Packet loss limit and ping limit would be an easy way to see if issues would remain.

    But since every thing he have done to make it more fair for lowpingers.
    Have resulted in hate from everyone with a bad connection.. What more is there that he can do!?

    He hasn't "done" anything. He doesn't even understand the problem. He claimed something that happens every single day here is impossible. He needs to be replaced. THAT is why this problem isn't getting fixed. THAT is why netcode issues have existed for at least 3 Battlefield games. You're giving software developers way more credit than they deserve here. They're not infallible but they do need to admit to their limitations. Dice also needs to recognize this.

    Lol, ignorance breeds ignorant opinions.

    Don't hate on the dude who is fighting for low ping.

    It's up to the leads, not the designer. That's how it works in every facet of game dev.

    Your insults prove you're not here to help so don't project. What you're claiming isn't mutually exclusive. You do know that right? Also I'm not hating anyone, I'm point out DICE's failures. If you comprehended what you read, you would know that.

    What did I state that is not mutually exclusive?

    Being ignorant isn't preferable, but to acknowledge ignorance is not necessarily an insult. I didn't mean to insult you, but you blaming the designer is not beneficial (there is a netcode team, and they answer to production leads, who answer to EA). Just trying to shed some light, as knowledge is power.

    You claim the dev that interacted here doesn't understand, that's not true.

    DICE recognizes that a large portion of the audience has poor connections, due to the backlash of the initial 100ms cap, there isn't much chance of DICE clamping down on poor connections again. This is unfortunate as there are tangible issues regarding player desync still in the live client, that doesn't mean things are being ignored.

    You blame all of the netcode problems of the last three games on one dev, I'd love to see the factual evidence you have to back up that opinion, from my perspective, it seems like a purely negative assumption.

    There you go with more insults. Grow up and don't bother replying to me again.
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Mearen1911 wrote: »
    Mearen1911 wrote: »
    Mearen1911 wrote: »
    lizzard wrote: »
    lizzard wrote: »

    Please king.. Stop this nonsense...

    A hitreg bug, would be something specific to a given instance.

    Switching guns while reloading. And then have no hitreg.

    Enter vehicle as a class and then exit vehicle, and have no hitreg.

    Something like the previous hitreg bug that made some players unable to hit any one without restarting the game for example!

    General hitreg would be that you sometime doesn't get a hit on someone.
    Maybe one hit isn't counted out of 5 hits.

    Drop that "crazy hostility" you've got going..

    I'm not going to play semantics with you, and I'm not going to allow semantics to dismiss the feedback of myself and others, you're literally making nonsense claims. Bugs, issues, problems.... WHO CARES? These terms are not the point.

    I'm also not the one declaring that the dev has no reason to further interact.

    It seems you have dismissed the idea of legit hit-reg bugs and are now blaming supression and spread, I'm not going to follow a narrative simply out of ease.

    If you don't think the netcode, or legit bugs are to blame, thats totally fine, not a problem, what we don't need is you dismissing feedback.

    Im not dismissing feedback!
    I'm not saying there is no hitreg issues!

    I do doubt that mischkag can do much more, under the circumstances!

    Packet loss limit and ping limit would be an easy way to see if issues would remain.

    But since every thing he have done to make it more fair for lowpingers.
    Have resulted in hate from everyone with a bad connection.. What more is there that he can do!?

    He hasn't "done" anything. He doesn't even understand the problem. He claimed something that happens every single day here is impossible. He needs to be replaced. THAT is why this problem isn't getting fixed. THAT is why netcode issues have existed for at least 3 Battlefield games. You're giving software developers way more credit than they deserve here. They're not infallible but they do need to admit to their limitations. Dice also needs to recognize this.

    Lol, ignorance breeds ignorant opinions.

    Don't hate on the dude who is fighting for low ping.

    It's up to the leads, not the designer. That's how it works in every facet of game dev.

    Your insults prove you're not here to help so don't project. What you're claiming isn't mutually exclusive. You do know that right? Also I'm not hating anyone, I'm point out DICE's failures. If you comprehended what you read, you would know that.

    What did I state that is not mutually exclusive?

    Being ignorant isn't preferable, but to acknowledge ignorance is not necessarily an insult. I didn't mean to insult you, but you blaming the designer is not beneficial (there is a netcode team, and they answer to production leads, who answer to EA). Just trying to shed some light, as knowledge is power.

    You claim the dev that interacted here doesn't understand, that's not true.

    DICE recognizes that a large portion of the audience has poor connections, due to the backlash of the initial 100ms cap, there isn't much chance of DICE clamping down on poor connections again. This is unfortunate as there are tangible issues regarding player desync still in the live client, that doesn't mean things are being ignored.

    You blame all of the netcode problems of the last three games on one dev, I'd love to see the factual evidence you have to back up that opinion, from my perspective, it seems like a purely negative assumption.

    There you go with more insults. Grow up and don't bother replying to me again.

    Those are not insults.

    Sorry you're sensitive to facts.
  • LOLGotYerTags
    12816 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    edited September 2017
    Are we in kindergarten again?

    Either find some common ground and reply to each other respectfully, Or don't reply to each other at all.

    Nobody is saying you have to agree with each other, We do appreciate and encourage debate ( thus being the backbone of any forum ), But when it comes down to just insulting each other, It makes you look bad.

    We're all adults here, Let's begin behaving like such, Yes?
Sign In or Register to comment.