1 2 3 4 Previous Next 125 Replies Latest reply: Mar 20, 2012 3:07 PM by BrokenBladez Go to original post RSS
  • 10. Re: So, those against dedicated servers need to SIT DOWN.

    An "open your eyes type of thing" because your opinion is "right."

    I've definitely played COD games in the past with people overseas without lag. Yes, MW3 can be particularly bad at times, but judging a whole experience off of one match when you've had a game 2 days is a bit of a rush.

  • 11. Re: So, those against dedicated servers need to SIT DOWN.
    deucedouglas

    We don't need dedicated servers. Look at MW2. It still runs butter smooth to this day and as far as I'm concerned so does Black Ops. I understand what they were trying to do by trying to make it an even playing field for everyone but they failed miserably. If MW3 ran like MW2 it would be a great game.

     

    I could settle for getting blown up by Dead Man's Hand from 40 feet away if when I shot people they died and when they shot me I took damage. They've taken the most basic aspect of the game and completely thrown it off kilter.

  • 12. Re: So, those against dedicated servers need to SIT DOWN.
    BrokenBladez

    That's hogwash, and anyone that believes it are sheep.  Okay, the population is tenfold... but so are the profits, if not more.  OF COURSE it's going to cost more for COD to do it, but they make WAY MORE money.  This is common sense, really.  It's not a valid excuse, not at all.  And once the infrastructure is in place (The actual expensive part) maintaning them is a fraction of that cost.  It's an investment in the games future.  Not to mention it would make the game much more playable on a worldwide scale, undoubtedly increasing the population of the game and future profits.  You really don't have to have a BS in business to see this simple fact.

  • 13. Re: So, those against dedicated servers need to SIT DOWN.
    nightpr0wler76

    BrokenBladez wrote:

     

    That's hogwash, and anyone that believes it are sheep.  Okay, the population is tenfold... but so are the profits, if not more.  OF COURSE it's going to cost more for COD to do it, but they make WAY MORE money.  This is common sense, really.  It's not a valid excuse, not at all.  And once the infrastructure is in place (The actual expensive part) maintaning them is a fraction of that cost.  It's an investment in the games future.  Not to mention it would make the game much more playable on a worldwide scale, undoubtedly increasing the population of the game and future profits.  You really don't have to have a BS and business to see this simple fact.

    +1, its all about money, activision is greedy, and they have a bunch of morons on here drinking their kool aid.

  • 14. Re: So, those against dedicated servers need to SIT DOWN.
    CowboySr

    I used to play Battlefield Vietnam for the PC. Was all conquest. Coolest game. Jumping on scooters and jeeps, changing radio stations to here different rolling stones songs. Game looked so cool, I didnt care about the endless running only to get picked off by a *(() in the weeds. 

     

    I like a lot of things about BF3. The vehicles, the large maps, the recon tools and the way you level up classes. But the game just doesnt run smooth like COD. I wanted to like it more. But, it just feels choppy. The controls feel inaccurate and the weapons feel unresponsive.

     

    What Id like is to put the Cod engine with smooth animation and controls, into the Battlefield maps with vehicles. The result would be the best FPS of all time. But, both sides are too stubborn and ignorant.

  • 15. Re: So, those against dedicated servers need to SIT DOWN.
    BrokenBladez

    I agree.  The game isn't nearly as smooth as COD, which is undoubtedly why it's not as popular.  I hope medal of honor is close to the battlefield version of COD.

  • 16. Re: So, those against dedicated servers need to SIT DOWN.
    CowboySr

    When you're running in BF, its like you're having a seizure, or carrying a poopy.

  • 17. Re: So, those against dedicated servers need to SIT DOWN.
    ChronicCritic

    If EA can provide servers then so can Activision, Activision makes more per game than EA.

  • 18. Re: So, those against dedicated servers need to SIT DOWN.

    1 - Dedicated servers are not needed, its 6v6

    2 - Gears have them because their P2P was flawed

    3 - BF3 is awful, client side hit detection = dying around corners constantly, Higher ping larger advantage you get(up to an extent). People say around 100-150ping seems to work best for BF3

     

    I've been in some games where i lag but i leave, vast majority of games it does not affect me

  • 19. Re: So, those against dedicated servers need to SIT DOWN.

    tell me about it im gettting really tired of the all the lag switchers being host run into that too much now adays,

1 2 3 4 Previous Next