I’ll be honest: I think matchmaking is just a better experience for how I like to play FPS games. I never got a sense of “community” from sticking with a given server; I would come to find something like it via Discord years later but not just from frequenting a given game server. My server browser experience was mostly that I’d join a game in a progress, as other people come and go from a game in progress, and I wondered what the point of the match was if the teams weren’t even the same at the end of the match as when they began. Most people’s default when running a server was to turn player numbers to max and, in Battlefield’s case, “tickets” needed to win as well, but just because the numbers are bigger doesn’t mean that it’s better pacing for a match, for instance. Matchmaking sets the defaults and ensures a pretty consistent experience from start to finish of each match.
This comment from the developer is true, too.
“Matchmaking servers spin up in seconds (get filled with players), and spin down after the game is over,” Sirland wrote in a thread on X last week. "That couple of seconds when servers lose a lot of players mid-game is the only time you can join, which makes it a tricky combination (and full of queuing to join issues).
My preference for the matchmaking experience is reflected across the audience they cater to, and it contributed to an industry focus on matchmaking and the end of server browsers.
But we still need real server browsers.
If we bought a game, we should be able to do what we want with it, including running those max player/max ticket servers that run 24/7 on one map. We should be able to do it without DICE/EA’s permission, on our own if we so choose, without salaried staff running master server operations, because one day the revenue this game brings in will not justify the costs to keep it going. We should be able to deal with cheaters by vote kicking them from the server rather than installing increasingly invasive mandatory anti cheat solutions that don’t even fully solve the problem anyway, because it’s unsolvable.
Article about BF6: shows picture of BF2042.
Because it talks about the same “Portal” feature in 2042 that came before.
I always liked going into older BF servers that weren’t so populated just to be able to get a lay of the land without being destroyed in three seconds.
Or to be able to use the vehicles and get used to them without as much threat.
Maybe I just want a mode that lets you free-roam maps…
Sounds like you just like sight-seeing tbh.
I do! I enjoy camera modes in games a lot, too. I like to look at the architecture in games because I think it’s fascinating.
For BF, though, I do think a little playground would be great. Since they have that map builder tool, I may end up just having to make one myself.
Especially for adjusting piloting controls. If you try to do that while playing a normal match you may not ever even get to fly a chopper to see if you made a good change, for example. I played the beta all day on Saturday and didn’t get a chance to fly anything during that time.
I miss community servers terribly.
They have a browser where you can run your own games. If you use official rules, you get full xp. I don’t get what people are complaining about.
You can earn full XP in Portal matches as long as the house rules closely resemble the vanilla ones
Yep. This is the correct answer but that’s not what this thread is about; it’s a nostalgic circle jerk mixed with a sprinkling of “back in my day”.
Don’t get me wrong here, I like the suggestions in this thread but literally one of the suggestions being upvoted is how the game is planned to handle servers (quick join is random and then there will be a list of community servers).
I’m fine with the official servers being random join, as long as I can pick and choose a community server. Which to state again, is apparently planned.
I’m still waiting for reviews on release to make sure they hold true to their marketing though. Can’t trust shit from large studios.
As per the article, persistence, and a way to bypass DICE.
Speaking for myself, I miss multiplayer games before they had XP and progression.
They are persistent, they stay open as long as someone is in it. No one is kicked after the game.
Bypass dice isn’t a feature but a fantasy, never happening. I don’t really get what it would bring to the table either.
The ability to keep the video game. The ability to play it on a LAN. It’s not a fantasy; it’s history. We used to have this.
That’s more then a server browser. You are just being deceptive. You cherry picked the one quote in the article that makes it look like there is nothing in your post and your comments aren’t honest.
What you are talking about is a whole other debate entirely and simply not how the industry runs anymore when it comes to multiplayer shooters.
I want that stuff too but that’s not what server browser means. The finals and cod don’t have server browsers. Bf6 will have a server browser.
IMO it’s the opposite, what exists now is less than a server browser. I’d call it a custom games browser instead. Whichever one you pick will be on the official servers.
I agree it isn’t how the industry is now, but it isn’t going to improve if everyone just accepts it.
That limitation, and the inability to sidestep DICE by renting a server that never shuts down, made it difficult for communities to take shape in Portal.
The ideas are bound together. Same with anti cheat. Same with preservation. Removing private servers caused all of these problems at the same time. The author of the article speaks for the group who want the community that I admitted never mattered to me, that Portal doesn’t provide, but other knock-on effects of the death of the server browser do matter to me.
There is a server browser. There are no servers hosted on private machines. I would like fully private servers too but there is still a server browser regardless.
You are conflating two different things.
They have explained what they are complaining about several times now, so get off your pedantic horse and either join the conversation that is happening or fuck off.
Bit it doesn’t even work on linux, basically DOA for me.
supposedly doesn’t work on windows either if you play valorant or maybe other games with similar anticheats competing for the same system area no video game shoud have control over
ah so that post I saw the other day saying “begun the kernel wars have” makes senses. someone posted the fact they couldn’t play BF6 cause Valorant was installed.
yeah. I’ve been wondering when this would happen since spore. Took longer than I expected really.
I loved the servers that were 24/7 metro, no drags etc. some of those were (and still are) my favorite. Or pistols only, no Glock 18. When you get rid of custom servers you get rid of that custom experience.
Didn’t the try something similar in 2042 but on their own servers? edit: portal
Yeah, and it’s coming to 6 as well, now with a map editor.
It would be nice if we had both options. Let peoe matchmake for the default experience and let those that prefer custom servers to use those instead. There are problems with using only community hosted servers, such as game rules and less ideal admins.
That behind said, the longetivity that community servers offer is likely the reason they have been scrapped by EA. They want everyone to move to the next title that comes out like what people so with CoD.
unless they changed it, that’s how csgo works.
Server browsers are the better experience for me. Jump in a game and its already going, less pressure to stay because there’s no matchmaking ban/penalties. Everyone is there primarily to have fun because KD WL MMR ELO isnt being logged. If im desperately outclassed, or life gets in the way, I can just quit with no guilt or punishment. If im having a good time i can stay with mostly the same people for a long time.
Thats before you even get into the technicalities and longevity considerations.
Plus it’s great if the server is made specifically for a map you really love. Like TFC/TF2 with say 24/7 2fort. I love me some 2fort and yeah I will play it for hours on end, it’s comfy.
STOP BUYING GARBAGE THEN
A server browser similar to Arma would have been a godsend as it allows people to set up unique rules, experiment with different game modes and play around the map itself. While BF isn’t a milsim sandbox game a server browser is what keeps older BF games alive especially on console and the removal of that does make you wonder if we’ll be playing BF6 a decade down the line.
They are implementing just that. Official servers don’t show up on it but everything hosted by the community does.
God yes. I would rather have a few popular servers over endless empty matchmaking
Vote with your wallet and don’t buy this. Many years ago we’ve got dedicated servers and free map builders. Nowadays we get matchmaking and 3 maps and additional 3 for 20 bucks.
I played the BETA, its good, I’m buying.
When it comes to video games you will always get outvoted by millions or children who don’t know any better and don’t care.
Oh no, whatever will I do with my time if I can’t play with literal children.
One doesn’t need to replace the other.:)
The big problem with matchmaking is that in the long run, it kills game. When people start to move on to a new thing, the population that stays because they’re attached to the game gets fucked over by matchmaking.
The less people they are, the worse it works. That’s when a server browser and the ability to run community server becomes crucial. It will keep a game alive for a decade after its last update.
That’s perfectly acceptable justification to shut down gameservers and profit from people moving to the next version of the game. Gone are the days of private servers, especially with client and serverside mods, that kept people engaged with an older game for years. That’s not profitable.
How would a server browser help in that case?
Matchmaking puts people into a limited number of servers. Yeah, you get the problem of realizing that those folk have been playing Tribes 2 for over twenty years at this point but you also have people to play with on that one 24 player server. Versus twelve servers with 2 players and a bunch of bots (if the game has them) each.
I always would rather both options. But from a game health standpoint… hoppers tend to have clear advantages at most player counts.
I think the general idea is that if I want to spin up a server for my friend group that’s been gaming together for 20 years, we can buy the game and do just that. That’s opposed to the money I spent on the game being useless when they decide they want to stop paying for servers.
They will have community servers with its own browser. The servers will have full xp as long as the rules are close to the official ones.
Matchmaking wont be the only option.
Source?
Still, DICE insists the Portal browser will satisfy. It does have some qualities that simulate a classic server experience, like how you can earn full XP in Portal matches as long as the house rules closely resemble the vanilla ones.
From the article.
The community “servers” aren’t persistent though. They’ll only stay online as long as someone is online and using that instance. If that last person leaves the server shuts down - as far as we know, it still seems a like murky, but without being able to rent servers I can’t imagine them just leaving all of them online for free
Bring back community servers, so the developers can keep their official servers and people that want to play on community servers can do that do.
It’s a solved problem that publishers tells you is hard to do in the name of money.
Don’t look harder into it.
That’s exactly what they did. You have official matchmaking, then you have community servers people host. If you use official rules, you can still earn xp in the community servers.
They have a server browser, official matchmaking servers just don’t show up but they only last one game anyways.
More like a real server browser with real self hosted dedicated servers. Couldn’t imagine mods at this point
