EA's BF 1 rental server program info released. PC pays premium price.

[Prysin]

4 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

Inb4, Nestle comes to your house and demands you pay up .

Lol. And here I am with a 60Hz monitor.........

lol, good one

[Misanthrope]

16 hours ago, Prysin said:

oi, smarties. you know WHY its more expensive?

@GSTARR@Orangeator@tlink@Notree

 

BECAUSE PC GETS THE ABILITY TO RUN HIGHER TICK RATE SERVERS. AKA MORE TICKS = MORE SYNCS = HIGHER REFRESH MONITORS ACTUALLY MATTER!!!! PC CAN ACTUALLY RUN UP TO 120Hz SERVERS. PS/XBOX CANNOT

PS/XBOX WILL BE LIMITED TO 30-45Hz SERVERS -> AS USUAL!! -

Has EA confirmed this will be the case? Because one could run higher tick rate servers but it doesn't means they will. 

[tlink]

13 hours ago, Bleedingyamato said:

 

Question: Can't people just use their own computer or build a server PC to use and do this that way?

 

Idk about server stuff but don't people normally just host their own severs for free?

 

 

This seems like a lot of money to me..

there is no official wording on it i believe, but it looks like they hold a monopoly on hosting. but then again so does blizzard and they have had loads of fan servers. eventually someone will crack the system.

[tlink]

32 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Has EA confirmed this will be the case? Because one could run higher tick rate servers but it doesn't means they will. 

my source seems the place where they post feature updates etc, it isn't in there so until then its just guessing.

[TrigrH]

18 hours ago, That Norwegian Guy said:

I bet they won't even be higher tickrate than the console offering.

all bf1 servers are 60hz, no tickrate settings

[tlink]

4 minutes ago, TrigrH said:

all bf1 servers are 60hz, no tickrate settings

source?

[Senzelian]

17 hours ago, tlink said:

nobody is saying anything about an equal playing field. i don't play games like these to be highly competitive. i play them for fun. why can't we just get all? cross platform servers, console servers, and pc servers. viola problem solved.

No console player would want to play on the cross platform servers, because there will be the pc players. 

[TrigrH]

4 minutes ago, tlink said:

source?

DICE’s producer David Sirland confirmed on reddit that Battlefield 1 will sport a 60Hz default tick rate. 

[matrix07012]

17 hours ago, corrado33 said:

I never said it'd be an equal playing field, but the technology is there to make this easy. There's no reason NOT to support it. It's also perfectly possible to play console games with a keyboard and mouse if they feel that their "wittle controllers aren't wup to the task of beating the "nasty" PC gamers."

 

Easy enough to have "controller only" servers. In fact, the games that I have played that were crossplatform all had this. 

The technology is there, some devs even have it ready to a point where they can just press a button and release it, but console manufacturers (especially Sony) won't allow it.

I would love cross platform multiplayer (especially in games where precision is not needed), because it would increase the player count and allow people to more play together and it would increase my K/D ratio, because people with controllers are useless in shooters.

My only problem is autoaim.

[Prysin]

1 hour ago, Misanthrope said:

Has EA confirmed this will be the case? Because one could run higher tick rate servers but it doesn't means they will. 

EA and DICE has previously said that high Tickrate BF 4 and BF Hardline servers WERE actually high tickrate.

 

The added cost for PC is most likely due to EA treating every server the same, and thus reserving equal amounts of hardware to each "VM" or "server" rather then try use dynamic resource adjustments. Which, knowing EAs cheapness, would be less then ideal and break all the time.

 

Also, the network bandwidth they would have to reserve would cost A LOT. There isnt a single sane ISP that is going to allow dynamic bandwidth alteration within less then 5 minutes of traffic picking up (usually game servers have fixed schedules were activity spikes, but sometimes it can be less due to other games or RL events drawing away the gamers attention). The ISP will tell EA to fork out for more bandwidth or fuck off.

 

Everything has a natural explanation.

[Misanthrope]

Just now, Prysin said:

EA and DICE has previously said that high Tickrate BF 4 and BF Hardline servers WERE actually high tickrate.

Don't care about the past but this game since that alone is no guarantee: you need to get some sort of official confirmation before you pretend your argument is a valid reason for the higher cost cause it honestly doesn't looks like it is. I mean it's likely, but it's by no means confirmed for you to take such a condescending tone as you did.

[tlink]

1 hour ago, Prysin said:

EA and DICE has previously said that high Tickrate BF 4 and BF Hardline servers WERE actually high tickrate.

 

The added cost for PC is most likely due to EA treating every server the same, and thus reserving equal amounts of hardware to each "VM" or "server" rather then try use dynamic resource adjustments. Which, knowing EAs cheapness, would be less then ideal and break all the time.

 

Also, the network bandwidth they would have to reserve would cost A LOT. There isnt a single sane ISP that is going to allow dynamic bandwidth alteration within less then 5 minutes of traffic picking up (usually game servers have fixed schedules were activity spikes, but sometimes it can be less due to other games or RL events drawing away the gamers attention). The ISP will tell EA to fork out for more bandwidth or fuck off.

 

Everything has a natural explanation.

they confirmed in a reddit post that they are using the same netcode as in BF 4 although updated. pc servers will be running at 60, console possibly at 45 but i have yet to see anyone from the DICE team confirm that.

 

Edit: apparently GLOBAL default tick rate will be 60, so consoles and servers will be the same according to this. I'm not always too good with contextual reading but this article interpreted it as global 60.

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/Battlefield/comments/4p4xpg/ama_ive_played_quite_a_bit_of_battlefield_1_and/d4i1fe5/

[tlink]

1 hour ago, Senzelian said:

No console player would want to play on the cross platform servers, because there will be the pc players. 

simply not true, sure the majority doesn't want it, but for how easy it would be to put in...

[tlink]

1 hour ago, Misanthrope said:

Don't care about the past but this game since that alone is no guarantee: you need to get some sort of official confirmation before you pretend your argument is a valid reason for the higher cost cause it honestly doesn't looks like it is. I mean it's likely, but it's by no means confirmed for you to take such a condescending tone as you did.

so much this.

[Prysin]

2 hours ago, tlink said:

simply not true, sure the majority doesn't want it, but for how easy it would be to put in...

i dont think the majority gives a shit. They dont really know if it is a benefit to PC at all, because the only pc the MAJORITY of gamers own, is a fucking scrubby casual 500$ LAPTOP. Which is so much potato that a PS4 or Xbox is godlike in comparison.

[Curufinwe_wins]

8 minutes ago, Prysin said:

i dont think the majority gives a shit. They dont really know if it is a benefit to PC at all, because the only pc the MAJORITY of gamers own, is a fucking scrubby casual 500$ LAPTOP. Which is so much potato that a PS4 or Xbox is godlike in comparison.

How dare you suggest my 4k+ system is not what every self respecting PCMR user owns? /sarcasm

 

But yea. I'm not the type of person that would pay more than 5 dollars a month to host a gaming server (not including electricity and hardware costs ofc) so this is way out of my league.

 

Apparently though this is far cheaper than previous implementations...

[Prysin]

1 minute ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

How dare you suggest my 4k+ system is not what every self respecting PCMR user owns? /sarcasm

 

But yea. I'm not the type of person that would pay more than 5 dollars a month to host a gaming server (not including electricity and hardware costs ofc) so this is way out of my league.

 

Apparently though this is far cheaper than previous implementations...

4k+? oh please, you aint a "4k" anything system unless you can turn every slider to MAXXX

 

also, how's DX12 treating ya?

[Curufinwe_wins]

9 minutes ago, Prysin said:

4k+? oh please, you aint a "4k" anything system unless you can turn every slider to MAXXX

 

also, how's DX12 treating ya?

I was referring to the cost haha. 

 

I play at 3440x1440p 100hz which is pretty darn easy to hit at max or near max settings (since some AA options are just stupid, and DSLR is a bit intense haha) with the two 980tis when any sli support is present.

 

The only dx12 game I'm even remotely interested in so far is RoTR which works perfectly fine (although I'm pretty sure I'm running it on dx 11 because sli...)

 

On the games which don't support sli at all (but are somehow demanding) well that is why I have a gsync panel haha. Although again it's been a really crappy year and a half for game releases so I don't even have many new titles (I'm primarily a big sprawling rpg person).

 

 

EDIT: forgot about DS3. I'll pick that up once it is available for less than 20 dollars or so on g2a. Shadow of Mordor was a great game at that price, but not so much for full value.

[ivan134]

13 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

I was referring to the cost haha. 

 

I play at 3440x1440p 100hz which is pretty darn easy to hit at max or near max settings (since some AA options are just stupid, and DSLR is a bit intense haha) with the two 980tis when any sli support is present.

 

The only dx12 game I'm even remotely interested in so far is RoTR which works perfectly fine (although I'm pretty sure I'm running it on dx 11 because sli...)

 

On the games which don't support sli at all (but are somehow demanding) well that is why I have a gsync panel haha. Although again it's been a really crappy year and a half for game releases so I don't even have many new titles (I'm primarily a big sprawling rpg person).

 

 

EDIT: forgot about DS3. I'll pick that up once it is available for less than 20 dollars or so on g2a. Shadow of Mordor was a great game at that price, but not so much for full value.

So I guess the games you're looking forward to are mass effect Andromeda and cyberpunk 2077?

[Prysin]

15 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

I was referring to the cost haha. 

 

I play at 3440x1440p 100hz which is pretty darn easy to hit at max or near max settings (since some AA options are just stupid, and DSLR is a bit intense haha) with the two 980tis when any sli support is present.

 

The only dx12 game I'm even remotely interested in so far is RoTR which works perfectly fine (although I'm pretty sure I'm running it on dx 11 because sli...)

 

On the games which don't support sli at all (but are somehow demanding) well that is why I have a gsync panel haha. Although again it's been a really crappy year and a half for game releases so I don't even have many new titles (I'm primarily a big sprawling rpg person).

 

 

EDIT: forgot about DS3. I'll pick that up once it is available for less than 20 dollars or so on g2a. Shadow of Mordor was a great game at that price, but not so much for full value.

just gonna tell you this.

No matter what mode it runs, on Maxwell, its basically DX11 with better CPU usage. It has all the Async Compute and Shading shit turned off forcibly through the NVDriver. Yes, sucks, but meh. Aslong as the game works.

 

ALTHOUGH, kinda pisses me off when my APU can get close to my 950 (yes i own a ASUS GTX 950 Mini) in DX12 titles XD..... kinda retarded.

 

RoTR isnt actually DX12 btw, its more like DX 11.3 (Xbox version), using most of the GPU improvements with near zero of the CPU improvements that "true" DX12 would bring.

 

Also, i know the pain of missing/broken Profiles. 295x2 is great when it works, not so great when it doesnt....

[Curufinwe_wins]

2 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

So I guess the games you're looking forward to are mass effect Andromeda and cyberpunk 2077?

Oh yea!

 

1 minute ago, Prysin said:

just gonna tell you this.

No matter what mode it runs, on Maxwell, its basically DX11 with better CPU usage. It has all the Async Compute and Shading shit turned off forcibly through the NVDriver. Yes, sucks, but meh. Aslong as the game works.

 

ALTHOUGH, kinda pisses me off when my APU can get close to my 950 (yes i own a ASUS GTX 950 Mini) in DX12 titles XD..... kinda retarded.

I know, but GM200 doesn't get hit nearly as bad as GM206 and 204 in the move forward. The only thing that really kinda annoys me is that now a 1070 preforms very similarly (980ti OC is ever so slightly better than a 1070 most of the time) while consuming literally half the power, and since I'm a silent freak, I get kinda annoyed that in long gaming my gpus can hit high 50s even under water.

[Prysin]

2 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Oh yea!

 

I know, but GM200 doesn't get hit nearly as bad as GM206 and 204 in the move forward. The only thing that really kinda annoys me is that now a 1070 preforms very similarly (980ti OC is ever so slightly better than a 1070 most of the time) while consuming literally half the power, and since I'm a silent freak, I get kinda annoyed that in long gaming my gpus can hit high 50s even under water.

"can hit 50s even under water"

 

lol, that's not hot.

[Curufinwe_wins]

Just now, Prysin said:

"can hit 50s even under water"

 

lol, that's not hot.

It is for full custom watercooling haha. That's very hot. But yes I went for watercooling for the silence not the temps so that is the price I pay haha.

[Senzelian]

On 21.10.2016 at 1:40 PM, tlink said:

simply not true, sure the majority doesn't want it, but for how easy it would be to put in...

Are you seriously thinking console players want to get owned by pc players? That it is fun to get completly rekt? 

 

Even the best console players barely have a chance against mediocre pc players.

 

If they want play with us, let them buy a PC. 

[KuJoe]

$25/month for a server? That's not bad but I always prefer the "roll-your-own" option when it comes to servers. Let me pick the hardware, network, and location (latency) so I can host is cheaper.