Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Yesterday I came to find my BF4 waiting in my mailbox.

I'm pretty far into the campaign and so far I'm liking it. The guns have a good feel to them with fantastic sound - shooting the scar with bass turned up just feel satisfying.

I'm looking forward to trying out online play. I got the PC version BTW.

What kind of experience has everyone else had?

PC is the only way to go atleast until the new consoles are out.

I played the PC beta and I had a blast, nothing like blowing up skyscrapers in china.

My buddy already got banned from his first server for 'hacking'* I was sitting in the TS as he started up his first online match. Apparently he shot a helicopter down twice and the server admin booted him. 15 minutes is a new record for my group

*The normal term is not sucking at the game

I'd probably have gotten it myself if not for Origin still not letting me play my ME3. Makes me sad. I'll miss Titan Fall too at this rate.

 LordofHats wrote:
My buddy already got banned from his first server for 'hacking'* I was sitting in the TS as he started up his first online match. Apparently he shot a helicopter down twice and the server admin booted him. 15 minutes is a new record for my group

*The normal term is not sucking at the game

I'd probably have gotten it myself if not for Origin still not letting me play my ME3. Makes me sad. I'll miss Titan Fall too at this rate.

Tell your buddy not to play on player owned servers. Look for ones that say "DICE" instead.

Admins on player owned servers are generally players who have extremely high opinions of themselves, skillwise, and view anyone killing them as "hackers" or "glitchers".

Being someone who basically lived player owned servers for years, the answer to that is a no. Official servers tend to be quickly overrun by actual hackers and there's no one around to deal with them.

Servers are like everywhere else. Some servers are run by douches some aren't. Find a good one and you're set to go. Granted, he's ungodly good at PC shooters. People were weirded out when I announced I'd played thousands of hours of CoD4 over three years but I've kind of tapped out. He still logs probably 40 hours a week in shooters and has for nearly a decade. He's practiced as hell so I actually don't find it shocking that people see him and think he's hacking.

His plan though I think is to host his own server to run his youtube channel out of eventually. If my stand off with EA ever ends I'll probably go there too, but I don't see the glare contest ending any time soon :(

 LordofHats wrote:
Being someone who basically lived player owned servers for years, the answer to that is a no. Official servers tend to be quickly overrun by actual hackers and there's no one around to deal with them.

If you're not reporting them, they're not seeing them.

Seriously. File a report to DICE through Battlelog and they will bring the bloody hammer down if someone is actually cheating. The information that they have access to from servers is kind of scary.

Case in point: I got reported(and kicked from a player owned server) as a "hacker" because I "killed a tank with a sniper rifle". I was informed by EA/DICE that I was 'being investigated' and then within 20 minutes I had a follow-up saying that 'no additional actions were warranted' because of the fact that the server stores the information of how the actual kill was performed.

How was the kill done? One of the guys I was playing with had put C4 on the tank's rear armor and I shot the C4. The killfeed shows as [M40A5] rather than [C4 Explosive], but the server actually records the proper series of events.

All official servers are like that and have been for years. Problem is that hackers don't care. By the time it's actually done the hacker might have already cleared the server.

Don't get me wrong its not like official servers are dreadful or anything. Its just that when crap goes down, it is not a server where the problem can be promptly dealt with. Not to mention that a good player run server tends to have a community and that just makes the game funner. The environment is very different and more enjoyable. Just gotta find one not run by idiots/egotists.

 LordofHats wrote:
All official servers are like that and have been for years. Problem is that hackers don't care. By the time it's actually done the hacker might have already cleared the server.

Doesn't matter. Your Battlelog ID is tied to your Origins ID. If you leave the server, the data from that game is still saved. DICE can still pull the game data.

Don't get me wrong its not like official servers are dreadful or anything. Its just that when crap goes down, it is not a server where the problem can be promptly dealt with. Not to mention that a good player run server tends to have a community and that just makes the game funner. The environment is very different and more enjoyable. Just gotta find one not run by idiots/egotists.

Have fun with that then, because it pretty much does not happen. Player run servers are hideous and should not have ever been allowed.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Doesn't matter. Your Battlelog ID is tied to your Origins ID. If you leave the server, the data from that game is still saved. DICE can still pull the game data.

That wasn't my point at all.

Have fun with that then, because it pretty much does not happen. Player run servers are hideous and should not have ever been allowed.

Then you've had terrible luck.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
All official servers are like that and have been for years. Problem is that hackers don't care. By the time it's actually done the hacker might have already cleared the server.

Doesn't matter. Your Battlelog ID is tied to your Origins ID. If you leave the server, the data from that game is still saved. DICE can still pull the game data.

Don't get me wrong its not like official servers are dreadful or anything. Its just that when crap goes down, it is not a server where the problem can be promptly dealt with. Not to mention that a good player run server tends to have a community and that just makes the game funner. The environment is very different and more enjoyable. Just gotta find one not run by idiots/egotists.

Have fun with that then, because it pretty much does not happen. Player run servers are hideous and should not have ever been allowed.

Kan, you are wrong. Player run servers have always been in the BF games and have always been better. Just find a good one and stick to it. Hell this is pretty much how any good multiplayer FPS game has worked for the last 10-15 years. Be it counterstrike, Battlefield, unreal tournament or whatever.

Besides, good player servers always get a nice community around it. Standard servers are always full of douchebags who do nothing but camp for points. Bloody progression systems ruined my FPS.

Besides, your a filthy console gamer so you don't even know if it's the same on PC. Har har har.

How demanding computerwise is the game compared to BF3? My comp is about 2 years old and runs BF3 just fine.

Two of my pals in my D&D group picked it up for PC and have been loving it - nothing but praises for the campaign and for the online play.

 Soladrin wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
All official servers are like that and have been for years. Problem is that hackers don't care. By the time it's actually done the hacker might have already cleared the server.

Doesn't matter. Your Battlelog ID is tied to your Origins ID. If you leave the server, the data from that game is still saved. DICE can still pull the game data.

Don't get me wrong its not like official servers are dreadful or anything. Its just that when crap goes down, it is not a server where the problem can be promptly dealt with. Not to mention that a good player run server tends to have a community and that just makes the game funner. The environment is very different and more enjoyable. Just gotta find one not run by idiots/egotists.

Have fun with that then, because it pretty much does not happen. Player run servers are hideous and should not have ever been allowed.

Kan, you are wrong. Player run servers have always been in the BF games and have always been better. Just find a good one and stick to it. Hell this is pretty much how any good multiplayer FPS game has worked for the last 10-15 years. Be it counterstrike, Battlefield, unreal tournament or whatever.

Besides, good player servers always get a nice community around it. Standard servers are always full of douchebags who do nothing but camp for points. Bloody progression systems ruined my FPS.

Besides, your a filthy console gamer so you don't even know if it's the same on PC. Har har har.

Player run servers have been in, but they did not have the ability to kick or ban. That was managed by Punkbuster.

And punkbuster is always reliable

 Melissia wrote:
And punkbuster is always reliable

It's more reliable than letting some of the people who play FPSes enough to justify buying/renting a server have kick/ban power.

 Melissia wrote:
And punkbuster is always reliable

Yep. PB is terrible. At least on PC, all it could really do was catch script kiddies and people running simple hacks and even then bans could be circumvented by spoofing a MAC address (at least back in CoD4 days PB banned by Mac address). EDIT: And of course PB does stupid stuff sometimes. When I stopped plalyed CoD4, the steam overlay was still a 'unathorized driver device' and had been for over a year that would get you kicked from PB servers.

Of course dealing with hackers in the last BF I really remember, cause I don't remeber BF3 very well for some reason, was kind of impossible. The kill cam was the easiet way to spot aim botters and no recoil but BFBC2 had a kill cam that was useless for the task. Unless someone popped from nowhere and got 50 head shots in a row in a 30 second time span spinning in crazy circles or something, there wasn't much that could be done about them.

No idea if BF4 gives a useful spectator mode or killcam for tackling hackers/cheaters.

It's more reliable than letting some of the people who play FPSes enough to justify buying/renting a server have kick/ban power.

Well it is their server and technically they can run it how they want. My clan's COD server had a server rule against tubes and martyrdom and as an Admin I happily enforced said rules (two warnings then *banhamma swing*). But there's enforcing server rules and being a douche. One time we trolled a server for no reason other than it had banned one of our members for no reason at all.

 LordofHats wrote:

It's more reliable than letting some of the people who play FPSes enough to justify buying/renting a server have kick/ban power.

Well it is their server and technically they can run it how they want. My clan's COD server had a server rule against tubes and martyrdom and as an Admin I happily enforced said rules (two warnings then *banhamma swing*). But there's enforcing server rules and being a douche. One time we trolled a server for no reason other than it had banned one of our members for no reason at all.

Here's the thing in regards to setting up servers.

You do not get to set "server rules" and enforce them. You don't get to set up ranked games and do this nonsense about "Play our way or else!".

You want to set up special rules? Go unranked.
DICE has been very vocal about this and actually 'repossessed' servers from people who did such things on BF3 when complaints were filed.

Well yeah we did get to set the rules and there were servers for every strip of played. One of our allied clans operated two servers. The no tubes server and the tubes server (but they had like seven freaking servers).

And who in their right mind gives a gak about ranked? The people topping the ranked ladders are people who cheat or find ways to artificially increase their score. Its just some silly system where a bunch of people who can never get to the top playing actual games get to brag about how much better they are than everyone else.

Ranking along arbitrary metrics set by the devs is pointless and of course back in the day there were no 'ranked' servers. There were just servers. Where playing a game was actually about playing the game, not measuring epeens (I jest ).

 LordofHats wrote:
Well yeah we did get to set the rules and there were servers for every strip of played. One of our allied clans operated two servers. The no tubes server and the tubes server (but they had like seven freaking servers).

And who in their right mind gives a gak about ranked? The people topping the ranked ladders are people who cheat or find ways to artificially increase their score. Its just some silly system where a bunch of people who can never get to the top playing actual games get to brag about how much better they are than everyone else.

Ranking along arbitrary metrics set by the devs is pointless and of course back in the day there were no 'ranked' servers. There were just servers. Where playing a game was actually about playing the game, not measuring epeens (I jest ).

"Ranked" servers are those where you actually gain XP or unlocks that persist beyond that single game.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
Well yeah we did get to set the rules and there were servers for every strip of played. One of our allied clans operated two servers. The no tubes server and the tubes server (but they had like seven freaking servers).

And who in their right mind gives a gak about ranked? The people topping the ranked ladders are people who cheat or find ways to artificially increase their score. Its just some silly system where a bunch of people who can never get to the top playing actual games get to brag about how much better they are than everyone else.

Ranking along arbitrary metrics set by the devs is pointless and of course back in the day there were no 'ranked' servers. There were just servers. Where playing a game was actually about playing the game, not measuring epeens (I jest ).

"Ranked" servers are those where you actually gain XP or unlocks that persist beyond that single game.

And that's why the progression systems are terrible.

 Kanluwen wrote:
"Ranked" servers are those where you actually gain XP or unlocks that persist beyond that single game.

They are now. Part of the grand conspiracy to destroy the PC gaming master race. Go back to three years ago when times were flawless and everything was perfect. Where you could change the score limit so a match didn't last eight minutes and helicopters could be immortal and the gravity could be turned off so players could fly. Why I at the flip of a few buttons turn the running speed to sonic the hedgehog and power slide across the map. The good old days (/sarcasm).

But yeah If you're paying for the server, you can set whatever rules you want. That is in fact the privilge of private property. Your server, your rules within the bounds of what the game allows. If you don't care for said rules find another server. It's not like there's a grand total of two servers in any given game. I'm old school man XD For me the days where a private server meant absolute freedom for players were the golden ages. Probably partly why I'm not as active in shooters anymore. They're still fun, but communities tend to be stifiled more and filled with hypocrites who say private rules for private servers are 'forcing people to play the game their way' as if forcing everyone to play by the standard set by the developer isn't exactly the same thing.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
"Ranked" servers are those where you actually gain XP or unlocks that persist beyond that single game.

They are now. Part of the grand conspiracy to destroy the PC gaming master race. Go back to three years ago when times were flawless and everything was perfect. Where you could change the score limit so a match didn't last eight minutes and helicopters could be immortal and the gravity could be turned off so players could fly. Why I at the flip of a few buttons turn the running speed to sonic the hedgehog and power slide across the map. The good old days (/sarcasm).

But yeah If you're paying for the server, you can set whatever rules you want. That is in fact the privilge of private property. Your server, your rules within the bounds of what the game allows. If you don't care for said rules find another server. It's not like there's a grand total of two servers in any given game. I'm old school man XD For me the days where a private server meant absolute freedom for players were the golden ages. Probably partly why I'm not as active in shooters anymore. They're still fun, but communities tend to be stifiled more and filled with hypocrites who say private rules for private servers are 'forcing people to play the game their way' as if forcing everyone to play by the standard set by the developer isn't exactly the same thing.

Unless you're actually providing the server hardware yourself, you're renting the server not buying it. "Private property" doesn't matter one damn bit in either circumstance anyways.

With that out of the way I don't know how you can say that I'm being "hypocritical" with a straight face. And that nonsense about "forcing everyone to play by the standard set by the developer"?
Hilarious!
There is no reason whatsoever that you can seriously believe that it is okay to try and tell people "You can't use X, Y, or Z" in-game is okay just because you seem to believe that something is unfair or unbalanced.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Unless you're actually providing the server hardware yourself, you're renting the server not buying it. "Private property" doesn't matter one damn bit in either circumstance anyways.

I'm renting my apartment, but I can still decorate it however I want within the bounds of my lease and it is in effect my private space. Take for example tactical servers from CoD2 and WaW. THe games engine couldn't practically support their preferred ruleset even with mods. They were forced to set "don't fire your gun from the hip unless you're shocked turning a corner' as a rule because there wasn't a practical way to code that (well until someone made a mod that made hip fire accuracy horrendus that is). And within the bounds of the server they were at the time allowed to do that. The server was effectively theirs to do with as they pleased within the bounds of their rent agreement.

There is no reason whatsoever that you can seriously believe that it is okay to try and tell people "You can't use X, Y, or Z" in-game is okay just because you seem to believe that something is unfair or unbalanced.

Yeah. It's perfectly okay and why some people have such great difficulty grasping it is baffling to me. It's homebrew rules. A group of players who decided to set themselves with a different ruleset from the standard because they enjoyed it more. Before you could make a mod that didn't have grenade launchers at all to make it simpler but publishers have mostly forced modders out of mainstream shooters. If you don't like that rule set, there are thousands of other servers running the standard or entirely different rule sets. Promod servers, no tube serves, sniper only servers, gunslinger server. Games were healtheir back then. People could play it in whatever way they wanted because there were servers for all stripes and you could bounce between them at will. There was even a server marked "Hacker Server - Enter at your own peril" or something like that.

SO yeah. I'm completely serious. I could play a game the way I wanted to then, with people who wanted to play it like I did and people who wanted to play it a different way could find another server to avail themselves of their prefered style.

There's nothing at all wrong with that model except that some people whined incessently about it for no reason and publishers were happy to shut down the longevity of a single title to boost the viability of yearly releases.

I have to agree with the idea of "your server your rules".

If you don't like the rules of a private server, don't join. There's "headshots only no melee" servers in Blacklight which are stupid but people like them... and I just don't join them.

 Melissia wrote:
I have to agree with the idea of "your server your rules".

If you don't like the rules of a private server, don't join. There's "headshots only no melee" servers in Blacklight which are stupid but people like them... and I just don't join them.

Which is all fine and dandy, but guess what?

Most "rules" on a privately owned server on Battlefield are not actually in the title or actually set rules done by using the abilities set within the game to restrict kit choices. They're stupid nonsense that get put into the "server blurb" which you don't see until you have actually joined.

Do you know why that is? Because setting those rules as actual rules turn the servers into "Custom Servers" which mean you do not earn ranks or unlocks that persist past the server--and most importantly--your server is now no longer getting people via Quick Match.

So no. You can't put forward the idea of "don't join", because most of the owners go out of their way to avoid anything which makes it so the "server rules"(which, according to DICE--if you're not actually setting the server to "Custom" you are doing it wrong and can have your server taken from you with no refund) are immediately apparent.

Yes, I get it, Battlefield 4 is inherently flawed relies on the always-stupid "quickjoin" feature.

But see, I don't use quickjoin and tend to drop games that force me to use it, so I don't care

I finished the campaign - it was decent enough. I wasn't overly impressed in the later levels, but the first few missions were quite interesting.

It was a bit awkward when the game first starts though and you are pumped (so you turn up the volume).... and you hear: "Turn around, every now and then..... lalalala" I was a bit confused until I realized it was on the radio lol.

 Melissia wrote:
Yes, I get it, Battlefield 4 is inherently flawed relies on the always-stupid "quickjoin" feature.

But see, I don't use quickjoin and tend to drop games that force me to use it, so I don't care

Actually, it does not purely rely on "quickjoin". It has it as a feature and you can set a certain set of criteria (I.e. "I want to play Siege of Shanghai as a Conquest game") with the server browser being more complex (Set maps and game types you want to play).

However in both cases, if your server is not properly set to custom and you are not abiding by the rules that YOU agree to when you purchase/rent a server then you can be a complete and utter toolbag to players and get away with it because very few players are aware that this is actually a reportable thing.

Kanluwen wrote:stupid nonsense that get put into the "server blurb" which you don't see until you have actually joined.

That's because the developer dumbed down the master server list. You used to be able to write up a server description or info tab for a lot of older shooters where you could lay out the rules. Now there are character limits so servers can't necessarily spell out what they're doing anymore.

Do you know why that is? Because setting those rules as actual rules turn the servers into "Custom Servers" which mean you do not earn ranks or unlocks that persist past the server--and most importantly--your server is now no longer getting people via Quick Match.

That's the devs/publishers fault. No one wants to play a progression based game on a server where they can't progress. It's silly restriction that was enacted in reaction to 'quick level servers' which now that we can't even really mod FPS games anymore are already dead so continuing the restriction is kind of pointless. They could at least create a separate leveling track 'ranked vs unranked' but they don't even do that.

Don't blame the players for being forced to do something becuase the developer/publisher made an actual arbitrary decesion. Saying 'no tubes' is not arbitrary. You don't like playing in a match with tubes so you ask people not to use them and people who agree with your opinion will join the server and play with you using those rules. You as some who likes tubes (just an example here) are completely free to play on a different server even if the rule is not announced in the title. This is why favorites lists exist so you can find servers you like quickly.

Kanluwen wrote:you can be a complete and utter toolbag to players and get away with it because very few players are aware that this is actually a reportable thing.

Yeah we all get butthurt because there are douches in the world. Welcome to life. Don't play with them. The server browser is a laberythine entity out to ruin your day its there to help you find a server you like. There's no need to countinously complain about the ones you find that you don't like.

I fail to see how your objections are the fault of anyone but the developers for failing to provide them with a means of distinguishing their servers without gimping the players within in to having no earned xp.