BFV dedicated servers

Comments

  • RigormortisCAN
    5 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    What was wrong with the way it was in BF4?

    If you want a server you rent it/run it the way you want and have it visible to everyone playing and let players decide what server they want to play on.

    It's very simple.

    I think that EA wanted some of that sweet, sweet server rental money.

    So that's what they tried in BF1 and frankly if any of you are part of a community with 50 or more people you know what happened to the community mine fell apart, well not really but not everyone bought it so we all started playing different games.

  • Rev0verDrive
    6760 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Why aren't you working for DICE now? You know they only got a bucket of monkeys down in the basement banging on the browser code with ladels.

    Although it would be an honor of sorts to work for DICE I'm too old to be dealing with corporate bureaucracy. I'd rather do my own thing and publish through Steam. ;)
  • Jaskaman
    693 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited September 2018
    Jaskaman wrote: »
    TheSacar wrote: »

    Yeah, server admins would tell me that too. For whatever reason, 90% of players flocked to Noshar Canals, and so having a proper server would be tough to keep alive. Call me selfish, but if those players don't have Noshar-only servers to go to, then they have no choice but to join servers with good map rotations.

    That really is incredibly selfish. Because you could not find a server with the map rotation you wanted, you now want to basically force everyone to play like you want to. The reason the map rotations existed like they did is that people liked them. Now you basically want everybody to feel like you did back then and be unable to play the map rotations they want.
    You do realize that a) these people paid good money to host their server and it was just fair that they could set it up like they liked and b) nothing ever stopped you from renting a server and setting it up like you wanted.
    A good RSP strategy would make everybody happy. Those who want to play on community servers can do so and if EA has enough official servers, you might find one with your favorite rotation.

    Or the game could just have well rounded servers.

    I say, keep community servers unranked. If players want a official meatgrinder mode - give it to them as a matchmaking option or as an event.

    If you force every player to play 5 games in a row of maps and modes he don't enjoy he will find another game to play.

    Exactly. That applies to any player, which makes it difficult to know what the best solution would even be.

    I quit BF3 when TDM servers became all about 24/7 Noshar Canals. I want RSP to stay away, but of course that's not the best choice to please everyone.

    You want RSP to stay away because you do not like the maps some servers are having? So, because you dont like something, you do not want we have Rentable servers? You can still play in Official mode as long as we have RSP as well, I don't get your point at all.

    You can't. RSP as it was in BF3, killed off servers with full map rotations.
    Well we want to have because with the help of Procon (or other rcon tool) (PC) and clans/communities, BF3 and BF4 servers are still running.
    When we had BF4 servers 2 years ago, we have full rotation CQ (48P) and full rotation mixed server (32 + commander) nearly all modes supported(Rush/Dom/small CQ/Obliteration/CTF) and that's what I call variety.
  • Jaskaman
    693 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited September 2018
    They should have just implemented Battelog into their games instead of getting rid of it. The Battelog server browser was much, much better than what we have now.

    My only, rather major, problem with Battlelog was the fact that I had to use a web browser to launch a multiplayer match in a AAA franchise game on PC. That was literally it. They could have put this feature in the actual game and I would have had no issue with it.

    I loved Battlelog, it was very good but if you remember there was a lot of whining and complaining about it so we got this worse system instead :)
    I would take Battlelog back if we would have an option for it ....
  • DazzUK70
    13 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I'm not fussed about dedicated servers . 60hz server tick way overdue on console been 30hz since forever, beta was 30hz on cq. I know pc is more powerful but last gen had 30hz servers too so it's time
  • Sixclicks
    5075 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    They should have just implemented Battelog into their games instead of getting rid of it. The Battelog server browser was much, much better than what we have now.

    My only, rather major, problem with Battlelog was the fact that I had to use a web browser to launch a multiplayer match in a AAA franchise game on PC. That was literally it. They could have put this feature in the actual game and I would have had no issue with it.

    That was the main thing I disliked about it too - having to use a browser to launch the game. Otherwise I had no issues with Battlelog.
  • olT3lo
    189 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    You can't. RSP as it was in BF3, killed off servers with full map rotations.

    No, lack of player interest in those full map rotations killed off those servers.

  • Jaskaman
    693 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited September 2018
    olT3lo wrote: »
    You can't. RSP as it was in BF3, killed off servers with full map rotations.

    No, lack of player interest in those full map rotations killed off those servers.

    I havent been around in BF4 scene lately but I can believe that's the real reason. I mean communities tries to run servers that people like, it's not like clans/communities are only making servers for themselves-otherwise those servers would be empty :)
    Without Rentable servers BF4 would be dead already :)
  • Reverend-1313
    178 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    Jaskaman wrote: »
    olT3lo wrote: »
    You can't. RSP as it was in BF3, killed off servers with full map rotations.

    No, lack of player interest in those full map rotations killed off those servers.

    I havent been around in BF4 scene lately but I can believe that's the real reason. I mean communities tries to run servers that people like, it's not like clans/communities are only making servers for themselves-otherwise those servers would be empty :)
    Without Rentable servers BF4 would be dead already :)

    Heck we still hop on and play Bad Company 2 every now and again. Still a really fun game, especially if you liked it when it took more skill to fly the helo's. I loved that flight model in BC2.
  • daniel_cps
    16 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member

    I quit BF3 when TDM servers became all about 24/7 Noshar Canals. I want RSP to stay away, but of course that's not the best choice to please everyone.

    back in the BF3 days I Owned 2x 64 player servers one running canals TDM in pure hardcore mode 24/7 and that thing was CONSTANTLY full.
    my other server (also hardcore, of course) had a cool map rotation and was very busy, but not busy as the canals one.

    Rented (and managed servers by US) is a MUST HAVE.

    same here, not pre-ordering until we hear something.
  • -Antares65z
    1696 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Jaskaman wrote: »
    Without Rentable servers BF4 would be dead already :)

    What a lot of Quick Match players probably don't realize is that after BF5 is released, EA will start turning off the BF1 official servers. Which means it will be the rented servers that keep BF1 going.

  • -Antares65z
    1696 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Heck we still hop on and play Bad Company 2 every now and again. Still a really fun game, especially if you liked it when it took more skill to fly the helo's. I loved that flight model in BC2.

    That is still one of my favorite games to play. The only complaint I have about it is the quirky movement that doesn't allow strafing while running. Definitely takes some getting use to.

  • A_Cool_Gorilla
    1374 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited September 2018
    olT3lo wrote: »
    You can't. RSP as it was in BF3, killed off servers with full map rotations.

    No, lack of player interest in those full map rotations killed off those servers.

    I doubt it. Players will flock to the full servers, but very few will join an empty one to get it running.

    If you can no longer find good servers, what do you do? Likely find another game.
  • olT3lo
    189 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    edited October 2018
    olT3lo wrote: »
    You can't. RSP as it was in BF3, killed off servers with full map rotations.

    No, lack of player interest in those full map rotations killed off those servers.

    I doubt it. Players will flock to the full servers, but very few will join an empty one to get it running.

    If you can no longer find good servers, what do you do? Likely find another game.

    First off, to answer some of the other responses, I too believe rented servers are keeping BF3 and BF4 alive. Only a fool would think otherwise.

    "Players will flock to full servers", yes, and how did those servers get full in the first place? Because players want to play maps they enjoy. I know there are players who would rather play on full map rotations (I'm one of them usually), but the truth is the majority want to play on limited rotations. If that wasn't the case, then full rotation servers would fill more often and stay full. They don't.

    Stop blaming things you don't like on rentable servers.
  • LumoColor
    521 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    olT3lo wrote: »
    Stop blaming things you don't like on rentable servers.
    Correctomundo, perhaps if people played either BF4 or BF1 for longer than 5 minutes they might be able to appreciate the value of community servers and not spend more time trolling a thread telling us we don't need them.
  • A_Cool_Gorilla
    1374 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited October 2018
    olT3lo wrote: »
    olT3lo wrote: »
    You can't. RSP as it was in BF3, killed off servers with full map rotations.

    No, lack of player interest in those full map rotations killed off those servers.

    I doubt it. Players will flock to the full servers, but very few will join an empty one to get it running.

    If you can no longer find good servers, what do you do? Likely find another game.

    First off, to answer some of the other responses, I too believe rented servers are keeping BF3 and BF4 alive. Only a fool would think otherwise.
    Only a fool would think community servers keep a game alive? Huh, woah... I guess Rainbow Six: Siege servers must be completely dead! No point jumping into some Quake Champions.

    Man, that sucks! I was going to play some CS:GO, but the official servers are probably dead there as well!
    olT3lo wrote: »
    "Players will flock to full servers", yes, and how did those servers get full in the first place? Because players want to play maps they enjoy. I know there are players who would rather play on full map rotations (I'm one of them usually), but the truth is the majority want to play on limited rotations. If that wasn't the case, then full rotation servers would fill more often and stay full. They don't.

    On maps they enjoy? Or do they merely join meat grinders to pad their stats and rank up more quickly?

    I don't doubt that there's a subset that loves chaos... but these kinds of servers seem to have gotten way more popular with the Frostbite games. I'd attribute the increased interest to other factors than just enjoying the gameplay experience alone.

    olT3lo wrote: »
    Stop blaming things you don't like on rentable servers.

    Without rentable servers, my experience would be more enjoyable. That's just the way it is.

    There's nothing wrong with disliking something.
    Post edited by A_Cool_Gorilla on
  • Reverend-1313
    178 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    olT3lo wrote: »
    olT3lo wrote: »
    You can't. RSP as it was in BF3, killed off servers with full map rotations.

    No, lack of player interest in those full map rotations killed off those servers.

    I doubt it. Players will flock to the full servers, but very few will join an empty one to get it running.

    If you can no longer find good servers, what do you do? Likely find another game.

    First off, to answer some of the other responses, I too believe rented servers are keeping BF3 and BF4 alive. Only a fool would think otherwise.
    Only a fool would think community servers keep a game alive? Huh, woah... I guess Rainbow Six: Siege servers must be completely dead! No point jumping into some Quake Champions.

    Man, that sucks! I was going to play some CS:GO, but the official servers are probably dead there as well!
    olT3lo wrote: »
    "Players will flock to full servers", yes, and how did those servers get full in the first place? Because players want to play maps they enjoy. I know there are players who would rather play on full map rotations (I'm one of them usually), but the truth is the majority want to play on limited rotations. If that wasn't the case, then full rotation servers would fill more often and stay full. They don't.

    On maps they enjoy? Or do they merely join meat grinders to pad their stats and rank up more quickly?

    I don't doubt that there's a subset that loves chaos... but these kinds of servers seem to have gotten way more popular with the Frostbite games. I'd attribute the increased interest to other factors than just enjoying the gameplay experience alone.

    olT3lo wrote: »
    Stop blaming things you don't like on rentable servers.

    Without rentable servers, my experience would be more enjoyable. That's just the way it is.

    There's nothing wrong with disliking something.

    If you think that its a direct and fair comparison between a company that removes all their own official servers (EA/BF) and one does NOT remove all their own official servers (CS/RB6) I'm pretty sure that removes you from being capable of competently defending your side of the conversion.

    Its one thing to have an opinion, we all get those. But when you base your opinions on things that carry about as much validity as saying the sky tastes like purple.......
Sign In or Register to comment.