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.
htj wrote:Could somebody explain this in stupid-terms for us illiterate cavemen? What exactly is meant by a server browser and how will this affect the game?
Pretty much the server browser does what it says, its a browser which lists the servers of said game. The majority of PC game multiplayer modes use them, such as TF2 and Black Ops. It doesnt affect the game in anyway but EA are using a system in BF3 which requires you to quit the game fully before logging into a new server instead of say jumping back a screen or two to the server browser.
I see. Hypothetically, would this affect co-op gaming? Or rather, gaming with your friends. Would it be impossible to select the same server, instead being luck of the draw?
I think it would affect co-op gaming, im not 100% sure since i very rarely play with friends as they all have xboxs lol.
When the rich rage war it's the poor who die
Armies I have: Chaos Space Marines, Tau, Necrons, High Elves
Armies I want:Lizardmen, Warriors Of Chaos, Dark Eldar
Armies I may get: Dark Angels, Tomb Kings, Vampire Counts
LordofHats wrote:On PC. Of all places not to have a server browser. But the consoles will!
Lulz, that's such fail.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
MrH wrote:It's a non issue, the Battlelog worked just fine in the alpha.
You might like crappy matchmakers, but I like to actually choose for myself as unlike a poorly written computer program I am intelligent enough to determine when a server is going to not suck.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
MrH wrote:I couldn't disagree with this comment more. If it sells well, which it should it is an indication that gamers still appreciate amazing games that push the envelope.
This game isn't "pushing the envelope." In fact it's going backwards in some areas.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2011/09/01 12:28:09
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
MrH wrote:What I find funny is all the people complaining will still buy the game on day one, like they all did with MW2. People just like to be apart of something, so they follow the leader like sheep.
I'm not going to buy it on day one. Or... likely day 100 for that matter.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
MrH wrote:What I find funny is all the people complaining will still buy the game on day one, like they all did with MW2. People just like to be apart of something, so they follow the leader like sheep.
I'm not going to buy it on day one. Or... likely day 100 for that matter.
Yeah yeah, we know you hate the game, it's getting stale.
MrH wrote:What I find funny is all the people complaining will still buy the game on day one, like they all did with MW2. People just like to be apart of something, so they follow the leader like sheep.
I'm not going to buy it on day one. Or... likely day 100 for that matter.
Yeah yeah, we know you hate the game, it's getting stale.
It's funny how inane fanboys such as yourself interpret "this game is not going to be the best thing ever produced" as "I hate this game I hate it HATE HATE HATE HATE HAEEEET!"
Well, either funny or pathetic. Dunno.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
MrH wrote:It's a non issue, the Battlelog worked just fine in the alpha.
Summed up perfectly
Some people obviously don't seem to know what an Alpha is. I don't doubt that it can work. I doubt that it will work (ignoring of course the numerous flaws of leaving your back end servers directly accessible on the web). I wouldn't even complain so much except for the fact that the server browser is the best possible means I can think of to change servers and a game interface the best way to operate a game. At best this system can only equal a server browser but never exceed it, leaving me wondering why on earth we're bothering with just a silly and annoying system. This is EA hosing the consumer in another hack jack job to combat piracy that won't work and isn't necessary.
I already didn't want to deal with Origin especially with their stupid 2 year clause and the fact I don't want ever publisher following EA's model. I have no interest in financially supporting stupidity in game design. So far BF3 these past few months has been full of it. Oddly similar of MW2 for me actually...
Just replace Marcellus Wallace with LordofHats and Bret with EA. More or less my feelings on the publishers and their idiotic attempts to screw me while not stopping pirates at all.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2011/09/01 14:23:43
MrH wrote:What I find funny is all the people complaining will still buy the game on day one, like they all did with MW2. People just like to be apart of something, so they follow the leader like sheep.
I'm not going to buy it on day one. Or... likely day 100 for that matter.
Yeah yeah, we know you hate the game, it's getting stale.
It's funny how inane fanboys such as yourself interpret "this game is not going to be the best thing ever produced" as "I hate this game I hate it HATE HATE HATE HATE HAEEEET!"
Well, either funny or pathetic. Dunno.
It's funny how you go into every topic about BF3, and even those who aren't about it, start saying it's crap, and call everyone who responds a fanboy.
No, I don't say it's crap, I say it doesn't look like "OMG THE BETS GAEM EVAR".
Even BFBC2 I give props for for what they did well, such as the sniping and cover system (until said cover is destroyed).
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
This sounds like a terrible idea. Matchmaking always makes me cringe. Give me a spreadsheet of servers, filter rules, and the option to do a direct IP connect if I want.
This isn't really an accurate topic is it? There is a server browser, its just in your internet browser, and you launch the game from there.
Eh, doesn't really matter to me, the only time I play BF is with my dad, and I just connect to whatever server he is on; hopefully that functionality is still there!
Melissia wrote:You might like crappy matchmakers, but I like to actually choose for myself as unlike a poorly written computer program I am intelligent enough to determine when a server is going to not suck.
You obviously don't know what the battlelog is, it's not a matchmaking system at all, you still pick the server you want to join. You really shouldn't get all "high and mighty" when you don't know what you're talking about.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/09/01 15:25:53
The question isn't why do I kill. The question is, why I don't kill everybody.
MrH wrote:You obviously don't know what the battlelog is, it's not a matchmaking system at all, you still pick the server you want to join. You really shouldn't get all "high and mighty" when you don't know what you're talking about.
And yet, it's not a server browser, and you have to exit the entire program to change servers. It's still inferior.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Soladrin wrote:Once again, missing the point.
You never had one.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/09/01 15:25:13
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
MrH wrote:You obviously don't know what the battlelog is, it's not a matchmaking system at all, you still pick the server you want to join. You really shouldn't get all "high and mighty" when you don't know what you're talking about.
And yet, it's not a server browser, and you have to exit the entire program to change servers. It's still inferior.
But it's not, it's actually faster to join a new server than it is in BC2. You just proved you have no idea what you're talking about and are just spouting rubbish.
Just to reiterate, for all the misinformed, the battlelog isn't a matchmaking system, you can still pick the server you want to join, you can still filter servers by region, ping, player count etc and it's faster than joining a server in BC2. You will all get to try it soon, hopefully then the stupidity will calm down a little.
The question isn't why do I kill. The question is, why I don't kill everybody.
MrH wrote:You obviously don't know what the battlelog is, it's not a matchmaking system at all, you still pick the server you want to join. You really shouldn't get all "high and mighty" when you don't know what you're talking about.
And yet, it's not a server browser, and you have to exit the entire program to change servers. It's still inferior.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Soladrin wrote:Once again, missing the point.
You never had one.
My point is, that you come into each and every topic about BF3, or any other modern FPS. Say the same things every single time, regardless of what the topic is actually about. And any response you get that doesn't seem to suit you get's shot down with claim of fanboyism.
Infreak wrote:I seems silly to have to exit the game in order to change servers, nevermind annoying. It'd be much faster if you were able to browse severs in-game.
You people are so tiresome, you really are.
The question isn't why do I kill. The question is, why I don't kill everybody.
Soladrin wrote:you come into each and every topic about BF3, or any other modern FPS. Say the same things every single time
So do you, what's yoru point?
Oh wait. You don't have one.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/09/01 15:53:13
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Infreak wrote:I seems silly to have to exit the game in order to change servers, nevermind annoying. It'd be much faster if you were able to browse severs in-game.
Agreed. Heavy emphasis on the annoying part. I can't remember the last time I played an online game of the same sort and just stuck to one server the entire time. Sometimes the map sucks, sometimes the people suck, sometimes you just want a different game mode, etc. etc.
“Sometimes I can hear my bones straining under the weight of all the lives I'm not living.”
Infreak wrote:I seems silly to have to exit the game in order to change servers, nevermind annoying. It'd be much faster if you were able to browse severs in-game.
You people are so tiresome, you really are.
Then how much faster is it? Can you alt tab out and view other servers while waiting to respawn? I do that if I'm in one server while waiting for another server that a friend of mine has been playing in to lose a person or two so I can join. Is that faster than the in-game server browser method? Is it faster to start the game than older versions BECAUSE of the removal of the server browser? What was their rationale for removing it? Typically, when it comes to UI design, the best and yet least followed rule is, "Unless you have a damn good reason to, leave it alone."
I can see really cool things that can be done with this, potentially. I don't expect them to actually do any of those cool things however.
I'm also skeptical to hear that "it's faster" and believe it until I actually see some numbers.
Infreak wrote:I seems silly to have to exit the game in order to change servers, nevermind annoying. It'd be much faster if you were able to browse severs in-game.
Agreed. Heavy emphasis on the annoying part. I can't remember the last time I played an online game of the same sort and just stuck to one server the entire time. Sometimes the map sucks, sometimes the people suck, sometimes you just want a different game mode, etc. etc.
I don't plan on having another e-argument with you, but please, please, please stop spouting misinformation, it's the blind leading the blind here. There is absolutely no reason to stick to one server, it's faster to switch servers with the battlelog, as I've said already. The game literally closes instantly and you're back on the battlelog, you hit refresh and you click join server, it takes maybe 5 seconds.
BC2:
Open the game > sign in > select soldier > click refresh servers > join server
Battlelog:
Open the page (you're already signed in) > click refresh servers > join server
As for switching servers it's faster because you don't have to go through all the loading that you do in BC2 when a game ends, you just close the game (which is instant) and click refresh servers and you're back on another server within seconds. I know new is "scary", but it's really not bad at all.
The question isn't why do I kill. The question is, why I don't kill everybody.
I guess I'm confused. Can you, or can you not, browse and select from different servers within the confines of BF3 while it's running?
If you can't, does this "Battlelog" thingy let you browse and select servers? (And I'm assuming connect and boot the game from there)
Edit: Answered by MrH. I guess my question now is what guarantee will I have that BF3 will close/boot "instantly," outside from the speculations based off of the Alpha? True, while it might close/open fast for your computer, a slightly slower one like mine might eat a couple minutes at least closing and opening, which would be slower than dis/connecting using a server browser within a running game.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/09/01 16:11:34
Imagine the feeling when you position your tanks, engines idling, landing gear deployed for a low profile, with firing solutions along a key bottleneck. Then some fether lands a dreadnought behind them in a giant heat shielded coke can.
darkPrince010 wrote:I guess I'm confused. Can you, or can you not, browse and select from different servers within the confines of BF3 while it's running?
If you can't, does this "Battlelog" thingy let you browse and select servers? (And I'm assuming connect and boot the game from there)
No. Yes.
The question isn't why do I kill. The question is, why I don't kill everybody.
daedalus-templarius wrote:Seems like a mountain is being made out of a molehill.
I would say that the concept of how big of an issue this is changes from person to person, and there's nothing wrong with like or disliking something. However, I don't think it's the topic so much as some of the people participating in this thread blowing things up and trying to incite anger.
“Sometimes I can hear my bones straining under the weight of all the lives I'm not living.”
When the rich rage war it's the poor who die 
