El Zartan

Server Rental, Yes I do.

6 hours ago, Sanslik said:

what sort of powers do admins get on bf1, can you still kick and ban from the servers?

No powers at all currently. You cannot kick or ban.

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Sanslik said:

what sort of powers do admins get on bf1, can you still kick and ban from the servers?

None

Even the owner can't kick/ban. So no option to set up admins and no option to allocate VIP slots.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, MrIbra said:

No powers at all currently. You cannot kick or ban.

...

7 hours ago, El Cockardo said:

None

Even the owner can't kick/ban. So no option to set up admins and no option to allocate VIP slots

Wow, just wow. It sounds so idiotic, what's the logic in this, am I missing something? 

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, Sanslik said:

...

Wow, just wow. It sounds so idiotic, what's the logic in this, am I missing something? 

I'd guess this one:

Quote

Firstly, I need to cover some history! In previous Battlefield titles, Rent-a-Server was handled in-game on console by EA while PC was handled outside the game client by third-party providers. This setup gave PC server admins a large amount of control on the game server but often at the cost of the overall player experience. The console server admins had very little control, but the player experience was very similar to playing on official servers. We all remember how as a player you would end up on a server that did not allow certainly gameplay elements and you would be kicked or banned immediately by accidentally using one of the restricted items!

So the challenge we set to ourselves at DICE was as follows - How can we increase admin control levels while not sacrificing the player experience?

Complete post in here: https://forums.battlefield.com/en-us/discussion/61545/an-announcement-from-alexander-hassoon-regarding-rsp

Sanslik likes this

Share this post


Link to post
50 minutes ago, Elbanco Rodriguez said:

So the challenge we set to ourselves at DICE was as follows - How can we increase admin control levels while not sacrificing the player experience?

The answer will come when you will have given us more money.

 

Results may vary.

Edited by kirikou97212
MrIbra likes this

Share this post


Link to post

@El Zartan had a good point today when i send him a batlfield 1 server.
it look like EA is back to their battlefield 2 way of renting servers.
they have the ip's, and they choose the gsp they want. who offers the most is a friend of ea.

i've seen that ppl expect kick/ban powers will be added some day in battlefield

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

So the challenge we set to ourselves at DICE was as follows - How can we increase admin control levels while not sacrificing the player experience?

Well it seems like they answered that with 'meh, lets not bother'

Or they found getting the balance was actually really hard, which means they should have thought about it sooner.

Maybe, just maybe they should have approached a number of the best community server admins and actually asked them how they manage to run a server with many admins that does not sacrifice the player experience. With that info they could build some relevent controls but the lack of understanding on their part still absolutely astounds me.

 

MrIbra likes this

Share this post


Link to post

They just outsourced public servers to the consumers. Horrible.

 

Money talks and we get served shit packed in as beef, but they didnt even bother to repackage it. I think EA is just testing the limits they can stretch things before it crumbles. So far, I think they are happy.

So many commercials on TV and internet. This costs. As long as they can sell more copies, they dont care if the person purchasing it plays for 30 minutes or 2000 hours.

 

So far I am just "happy" I bought the "light" version of BF1. All I am missing is a red skin on the teleporting airplane and a sniper rifle I don't need.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

I think I'm on their side. So, why not play the devil's advocate?

5 hours ago, El Cockardo said:

They should have approached a number of the best community server admins and actually asked them how they manage to run a server with many admins that does not sacrifice the player experience. With that info they could build some relevent controls but the lack of understanding on their part still absolutely astounds me.

3

I doubt that this would solve anything because they want to be sure that people are playing their game the way they intended it to be played.

Let's think it this way. I have something like 200hrs play time in BF4 and I still haven't played on all mods. It's like the time when I've discovered the rush-like-but-with-ships-thingy for the first time with You and Octi and was really happy about it but  it took roughly 170 hrs to find it.  This is what, I believe they mean by not giving too much power to the admins. Some mods or even maps die out just because admins don't want to see them on  their servers. 

Also, the server list is full of servers like "no mortar" "no sniper" "no shotgun" "no vehicle" "no this or that"... It's like releasing a brand new All-in-one PC but letting shops to sell it in pieces. 

4 hours ago, reke said:

As long as they can sell more copies, they dont care if the person purchasing it plays for 30 minutes or 2000 hours.

1

I don't think that is the case. They would give, their left bollocks and a nice handjob to reach the number of active players that other shooters like CS:GO has. Or to have popular teams and tournaments. 

For the ban/kick thing. I agree that it's important to have those to create a friendly environment but this only works if admins are good willing. It's like socialism, you trust the government but what if the government turns the country into China... I'm happy with the voting system to kick/ban people. It works here better than it does in any other game such as again CS:GO. It's because there are more players playing it on a single server so it's hard to manipulate the poll results with your band just to fuck with someone. 

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Space Chimp said:

 

I don't think that is the case. They would give, their left bollocks and a nice handjob to reach the number of active players that other shooters like CS:GO has. Or to have popular teams and tournaments. 

 

Does not seem to be logical at all. Had they wanted some sort of competitive scene, they would at least have added conquest small versions of the maps; They did not. Battlefield is way too "easy" to be played competitive. Look at the skill-ceiling in CS:GO. It would probably take years and years of endless nerding to be even remotely close to the top guys. This is not happening in bf as there is too much randomness and ways to kill enemies. It is just the way the game works :)

The problem comes when they overall just give shit back to everyone. All players get bored after a while, when you start to feel there is nothing more to do. When they just piss on everyone with not even allowing yourself (which has payed money) to enter in front of queue or kick players that are toxic on a server you have payed for. Their greediness shines through so hard I am actually wearing sunglasses.

Another example is that they yet again release an unfinished game, and they did nothing to hide this except write "Coming soon".....

 

kirikou97212 and DivXion like this

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, reke said:

Does not seem to be logical at all. Had they wanted some sort of competitive scene, they would at least have added conquest small versions of the maps; They did not. Battlefield is way too "easy" to be played competitive. Look at the skill-ceiling in CS:GO. It would probably take years and years of endless nerding to be even remotely close to the top guys. This is not happening in bf as there is too much randomness and ways to kill enemies. It is just the way the game works :)

 

Quite. As evidenced by the fact before I put BF4 to one side, despite being a self confessed noob with zero tactics 'cept shotguns and rockets, I could still top the scoreboard.

I had no right being up there, I have no skill and poor hand/mouse co-ordination

Share this post


Link to post

Fuck, I lost everything I wrote because of a fucking chrome extension and I can't be arsed to rewrite it. 

44 minutes ago, reke said:

Does not seem to be logical at all. Had they wanted some sort of competitive scene, they would at least have added conquest small versions of the maps; They did not. Battlefield is way too "easy" to be played competitive. Look at the skill-ceiling in CS:GO. It would probably take years and years of endless nerding to be even remotely close to the top guys. This is not happening in bf as there is too much randomness and ways to kill enemies. It is just the way the game works :)

There has been some community attempts to organize competitive tournaments and those were quite successful in my opinion.  As for whether EA is going to support this idea that remains to be seen but just a couple of weeks ago we saw that blizzard actually paying millions of dollars to have professional players play their game. So it definitely matters for every game that they have active players and as you said BF has a relatively small learning curve so it is a golden opportunity. I expect a move towards competitive gameplay from Activation or EA but again, we shall see. ^_^

 

http://mashable.com/2016/10/26/blizzard-100-thousand-guaranteed-minimum/

 

Edited by Space Chimp

Share this post


Link to post

I hope that Mr. Olofsson Hermanrud is not a troll.

Also I hope they invented arrows before 1914 because I wouldn't be able to keep the bow steady, too heavy with a grenade on it.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.