Before I continue, my point is not to defend BF4, bash BF2 or just be an ass in general.
However, these bullshit statements from "vets" are fucking annoying to read, since all it shows just how full of shit they are and how shit they must've been at the older games if they call that "netcode" "good". Because I've never heard anyone say that when those games were actively played.
TL;DR: I've said it before and I'll say it again. BF "netcode" is, always has been and most likely always will be utter shite when compared to UT/Q3/HL. BF4 is no better or worse than BF2; they're just crap in different ways. BF4's is more predictable however.
t00ner wrote:
Hahah what? What do you mean accurate? BF2 was miles ahead, first of all it had server side hit and collision detection with much higher tickrate than bf3/4.
Uh, no, it didn't. I can't remember exactly, but IIRC it sent 30 packets per second at most (that's the "tick" rate). That was *not* configurable server-side, it was baked into the game just like it is now. I remember being utterly confused at not being able to control jackshit in the BF2 servers I ran back then. Compared to other games, you've got very little control.
There were no controllable rates in BF2 like in CS or Q3. BF2's settings equated to a maximum of about 125 kbps (15 KB/s) per client on a full server - note that games like CS or Q3 allowed you to go up to 160 kbps (20 KB/s) and 200 (25 KB/s) respectively, each with 100 packets per second. Moreover, while BF2 had an interpolation setting, that didn't make any sense since you can't control the update rate. So while you could set it to 10 or 30 or whatever, it's pretty pointless since 90% of the time it's interpolating for the wrong fucking packet rate. Best to keep it as low as possible and hope the server decided to send you enough packets.
Oh, but it gets worse. Because DICE have ALWAYS had client-side lag compensation too (GSDefaultLatencyCompensation). And that is where the entire series has always failed miserably. Because that's where the netcode starts predicting what's gonna happen and that never goes right.
Yes it had server side hit detection, but like I've pointed out before DICE got that wrong too. Hate to break it to you, but Battlefield games have always been utter shite on the networking side of things and BF3+4 are much more accurate because their client-side compensation algorithms are much better.
I present exhibits A and B, first two hits on YouTube and only two of hundreds of videos I've seen over the years (and now imagine how many complaints I've seen from clients who didn't understand that their game was just broken):
So no. Your precious Battlefield has never been accurate. BF2 in particular (fuck, I'm so glad you picked that one, because 1942 was so much better than 2 was) was absolutely TERRIBLE. You and many other "vets" claim the same and you're all full of shit. You were either fucking terrible at actually hitting anything when you played that game or you're just hating now because you can, since everything that's wrong with BF4 was already there in BF2, you're just not willing to admit it.
And then you have the balls to compare it to CS and Quake too, which is even more hilarious. Anyone who played UT, CS or Quake or any game on any of those engines (CoD says hi, until they fucked it up with...*drumroll*...client side lag compensation) before they played Battlefield will tell you the same thing.
I have no issues with BF4 whatsoever, I can hit my targets just fine unless they're lagging like crazy - in which case, most games make it hard to hit them.
Well what you just wrote proves that you're another couch potato gamer like the millions on bf4 forums who say "BF4 is fine, I hit my targets just fine" - it only proves to me that you could not differentiate between what's a good and bad netcode.
BF2 netcode is far from perfect but still much much better than BF4 and here's why:
1. Server side vs Client side
2. 30 ticks vs 10
I would suggest for you to read about client side vs server side network communication models. If you have some knowledge in this topic think about a situation - a 300ms player enters a room and start shooting at 10ms player, what happens on screens and server packet by packet. I don't want to write a long and boring explanation, but after you analyze it you can see that the advantage is for the player with higher ping and that those 2 are playing/seeing a completely different game. This is exactly what happens in BF4 with so called instant deaths before you even see the player on your screen. Client side hit detection cannot be used in high pace fps games without experience being shitty but it is much easier to write compared to server side. The only scenario in which client side hit detection could work good and fair is when there is no ping to the server at all.
FYI every multiplayer game has client side latency compensation mechanism, it's not lag compensation. FPS games would appear very choppy (if suchj word exists) if it was not there. You can try setting cmdrate/updaterate in CS to 10 and ex_interp to 0 to see how it would look like (I don't think it's possible to set interp that low, might be capped at 0.001).
You also say that "vets" piss you off.. What pisses me off is "noobs" for which BF4 is very likely to be the first fps game they play ever played and write "I hit my targets just fine". I have played BF2 since demo till now very often (not BF2 but PR which is a mod) so I don't think you have a right to say that I might not remember how it was...
BF4 net-code is good for bad players because it is in fact easier to hit what they see, to bad that what the see on their screen is not what is happening on the other players screen (he might be behind cover for 2 sec already and still die) - low skill ceiling.
@t00ner i can't take you serious at all. You obviously never played bf2
I cannot bother to write anything productive as a reply to you because you already got a NFO's village idiot badge here (well earned). You tend to write a lot of shit on topics you got no clue about just like the last discussion we had on recoil vs deviation after which you just admitted to know nothing and shut up...
I probably have more BF2/PR hours played than you have on all bf series. Still playing PR weekly/biweekly so just stfu plz and go troll someone else.
What's funny is BF4 puts in things like its big spectactor mode for presumably competitive play but the servers run at 10 ticks, it's just funny.
BF2 and BF4 have completely different aims, BF games have progressively become more infantry based and yet the server performance is a complete joke
It's just sad that you can barely drive a bike or atv in BF4 because the server can't keep up with where you are and you just go flying all over the place
Same debates all over again... they switched from server side because people were complaining. Now they should switch back because people are complaining.
You will also get killed while behind cover with server-side detection - completely unavoidable either way.
Tick rate is not the thing that will magically fix everything.
I am also confused if I should hate BF4 because it's too vehicle-focused or because it's too infantry-focused.
Adding to all that, I am now seriously disappointed, since I should consider myself a noob player because I like to hit things that I can see, as opposed to hitting things I can't see like the "pro" players apparently do
Adding to all that, I am now seriously disappointed, since I should consider myself a noob player because I like to hit things that I can see, as opposed to hitting things I can't see like the "pro" players apparently do
Nah, it's all good if you don't mind. Just don't forget to pick up their premium package next battlefield installment where when you move forward the server and the players around take 3-5 seconds to register it.
We’re rolling out a new minor server update on PC. As usual, it will take some time before a majority of the servers have updated to this new version, so you might experience some connection issues in the upcoming hours. Change notes will be published at a later time. Stay tuned to the Control Room for the latest.
We’re rolling out a new minor server update on PC. As usual, it will take some time before a majority of the servers have updated to this new version, so you might experience some connection issues in the upcoming hours. Change notes will be published at a later time. Stay tuned to the Control Room for the latest.
Probably fixing that thing that didn't let me connect yesterday. Damn that thing!
Prefetian wrote:
MinderMast wrote:
Adding to all that, I am now seriously disappointed, since I should consider myself a noob player because I like to hit things that I can see, as opposed to hitting things I can't see like the "pro" players apparently do
Nah, it's all good if you don't mind. Just don't forget to pick up their premium package next battlefield installment where when you move forward the server and the players around take 3-5 seconds to register it.
I am not saying there is nothing wrong with how things are now, but I am quite amused by the sheer number of experts that pops up all over the net, who apparently know exactly how to fix things (with the fixes being apparently quite trivial) without having even a hint of how the game works internally, while DICE knowing it top to bottom, just can't quite figure out those simplest of things
I have no idea how to fix it, I've watched and experienced these issues first hand.
And apparently they can't fix the issues, because with every installment since BC2 using the forstbite engine it's just gone downwards with basic things such as hit-detection and syncing.
And to be honest, I don't think they can or will fix it in upcoming games so the only thing there is to do is either accept mediocrity or not to buy it. Unless I missed something.
Probably a problem with them always pushing the tech forward and "upgrading" their engine (now also with responsibility of making it work for all EA projects) while at the same time being pressured by the tight time schedules that got even tighter now that they are suddenly the new big game in town and EA's flagship title. Don't have a solid foundation to iterate on.
With that said, they never claimed the "new" BF series being a hardcore competitive shooter. You keep hearing them say that 100ms latency is good enough, which it obviously wouldn't be for a "pro" player. This is supposed to be a more mainstream entertainment experience, so things like that are not a priority.
Also, not gonna bring my "it works out fine for me" discussion into this again - already been over that
Yeah I would say it's a house-of-cards effect. The netcode hasn't actually changed since BC1 but they add more and more to frostbite and the foundation was wobbly to begin with. That's why the grander the cinematic experience gets the worse the playing experience gets.
They should scale back. WW2 or Vietnam or BC3 or something, limit things a bit, no more lelvolution just a better gameplay experience.
Well what you just wrote proves that you're another couch potato gamer like the millions on bf4 forums who say "BF4 is fine, I hit my targets just fine" - it only proves to me that you could not differentiate between what's a good and bad netcode.
BF2 netcode is far from perfect but still much much better than BF4 and here's why:
1. Server side vs Client side
2. 30 ticks vs 10
I would suggest for you to read about client side vs server side network communication models. If you have some knowledge in this topic think about a situation - a 300ms player enters a room and start shooting at 10ms player, what happens on screens and server packet by packet. I don't want to write a long and boring explanation, but after you analyze it you can see that the advantage is for the player with higher ping and that those 2 are playing/seeing a completely different game. This is exactly what happens in BF4 with so called instant deaths before you even see the player on your screen. Client side hit detection cannot be used in high pace fps games without experience being shitty but it is much easier to write compared to server side. The only scenario in which client side hit detection could work good and fair is when there is no ping to the server at all.
FYI every multiplayer game has client side latency compensation mechanism, it's not lag compensation. FPS games would appear very choppy (if suchj word exists) if it was not there. You can try setting cmdrate/updaterate in CS to 10 and ex_interp to 0 to see how it would look like (I don't think it's possible to set interp that low, might be capped at 0.001).
You also say that "vets" piss you off.. What pisses me off is "noobs" for which BF4 is very likely to be the first fps game they play ever played and write "I hit my targets just fine". I have played BF2 since demo till now very often (not BF2 but PR which is a mod) so I don't think you have a right to say that I might not remember how it was...
BF4 net-code is good for bad players because it is in fact easier to hit what they see, to bad that what the see on their screen is not what is happening on the other players screen (he might be behind cover for 2 sec already and still die) - low skill ceiling.
I was gonna reply in-depth, but given the fact that you did not bother to watch either video nor read my post, I can't be bothered. Instead you call me a couch gamer (I suggest you take a look at what I think of couch shooters ), suggest that it's my first FPS (not as if it's pretty clear that I have an HL and Q3 background) and then go on about more nonsense about what I do or don't know - all of which show you didn't read at all and just went into a rage because I say that BF2's broken.
As an added bonus, you say graphical interpolation is the same as lag compensation, which only strengthens my argument (hint: ex_interp in CS does not predict the future like the compensation in BF2, 3 and 4 attempts to do; BF has a CVAR for that interpolation too, which is separate from lag compensation).
Well what you just wrote proves that you're another couch potato gamer like the millions on bf4 forums who say "BF4 is fine, I hit my targets just fine" - it only proves to me that you could not differentiate between what's a good and bad netcode.
BF2 netcode is far from perfect but still much much better than BF4 and here's why:
1. Server side vs Client side
2. 30 ticks vs 10
I would suggest for you to read about client side vs server side network communication models. If you have some knowledge in this topic think about a situation - a 300ms player enters a room and start shooting at 10ms player, what happens on screens and server packet by packet. I don't want to write a long and boring explanation, but after you analyze it you can see that the advantage is for the player with higher ping and that those 2 are playing/seeing a completely different game. This is exactly what happens in BF4 with so called instant deaths before you even see the player on your screen. Client side hit detection cannot be used in high pace fps games without experience being shitty but it is much easier to write compared to server side. The only scenario in which client side hit detection could work good and fair is when there is no ping to the server at all.
FYI every multiplayer game has client side latency compensation mechanism, it's not lag compensation. FPS games would appear very choppy (if suchj word exists) if it was not there. You can try setting cmdrate/updaterate in CS to 10 and ex_interp to 0 to see how it would look like (I don't think it's possible to set interp that low, might be capped at 0.001).
You also say that "vets" piss you off.. What pisses me off is "noobs" for which BF4 is very likely to be the first fps game they play ever played and write "I hit my targets just fine". I have played BF2 since demo till now very often (not BF2 but PR which is a mod) so I don't think you have a right to say that I might not remember how it was...
BF4 net-code is good for bad players because it is in fact easier to hit what they see, to bad that what the see on their screen is not what is happening on the other players screen (he might be behind cover for 2 sec already and still die) - low skill ceiling.
I was gonna reply in-depth, but given the fact that you did not bother to watch either video nor read my post, I can't be bothered. Instead you call me a couch gamer (I suggest you take a look at what I think of couch shooters ), suggest that it's my first FPS (not as if it's pretty clear that I have an HL and Q3 background) and then go on about more nonsense about what I do or don't know - all of which show you didn't read at all and just went into a rage because I say that BF2's broken.
As an added bonus, you say graphical interpolation is the same as lag compensation, which only strengthens my argument (hint: ex_interp in CS does not predict the future like the compensation in BF2, 3 and 4 attempts to do; BF has a CVAR for that interpolation too, which is separate from lag compensation).
Well what you just wrote proves that you're another couch potato gamer like the millions on bf4 forums who say "BF4 is fine, I hit my targets just fine" - it only proves to me that you could not differentiate between what's a good and bad netcode.
BF2 netcode is far from perfect but still much much better than BF4 and here's why:
1. Server side vs Client side
2. 30 ticks vs 10
I would suggest for you to read about client side vs server side network communication models. If you have some knowledge in this topic think about a situation - a 300ms player enters a room and start shooting at 10ms player, what happens on screens and server packet by packet. I don't want to write a long and boring explanation, but after you analyze it you can see that the advantage is for the player with higher ping and that those 2 are playing/seeing a completely different game. This is exactly what happens in BF4 with so called instant deaths before you even see the player on your screen. Client side hit detection cannot be used in high pace fps games without experience being shitty but it is much easier to write compared to server side. The only scenario in which client side hit detection could work good and fair is when there is no ping to the server at all.
FYI every multiplayer game has client side latency compensation mechanism, it's not lag compensation. FPS games would appear very choppy (if suchj word exists) if it was not there. You can try setting cmdrate/updaterate in CS to 10 and ex_interp to 0 to see how it would look like (I don't think it's possible to set interp that low, might be capped at 0.001).
You also say that "vets" piss you off.. What pisses me off is "noobs" for which BF4 is very likely to be the first fps game they play ever played and write "I hit my targets just fine". I have played BF2 since demo till now very often (not BF2 but PR which is a mod) so I don't think you have a right to say that I might not remember how it was...
BF4 net-code is good for bad players because it is in fact easier to hit what they see, to bad that what the see on their screen is not what is happening on the other players screen (he might be behind cover for 2 sec already and still die) - low skill ceiling.
I was gonna reply in-depth, but given the fact that you did not bother to watch either video nor read my post, I can't be bothered. Instead you call me a couch gamer (I suggest you take a look at what I think of couch shooters ), suggest that it's my first FPS (not as if it's pretty clear that I have an HL and Q3 background) and then go on about more nonsense about what I do or don't know - all of which show you didn't read at all and just went into a rage because I say that BF2's broken.
As an added bonus, you say graphical interpolation is the same as lag compensation, which only strengthens my argument (hint: ex_interp in CS does not predict the future like the compensation in BF2, 3 and 4 attempts to do; BF has a CVAR for that interpolation too, which is separate from lag compensation).
Well I think that's not fair since I did read your post and the videos you posted plus many more similiar I'd seen years ago. On the other hand, if you'd watch the video's I had posted, you wouldn't have posted those 2 (I know it's 30min long but worth watching still).
I called you a couch gamer not because of your gaming history but because you have the same opinion about bf4 netcode as ppl for who BF4 is their first game, you don't see it as a fundamental flaw to the game. I had played bf and cs, q1/q3 competively, some on tournaments and I also have friends from my old clan who used to play bf2 on tournaments and they share the same opinion as me. BF4 not just due to netcode but many other design decisions lowers the skillcap to much and makes it hard for me to enjoy the game, because there is no real challenge.
I never wrote that latency compensation is the same as interpolation. I wrote it becuase in case of server side vs client side, that's the only one you can write about. BF4 doesn't have server side latency compensation same as CS because all shots are registered on the client and then just sent to the server as confirmed "hits". I don't know exactly how BF4 net-code is written, but comparing to CS there is no need to move the hitboxes in a timefrime, because... what for? Just interpolate them with the delta of ping variation. The only thing BF4 has (or might have) is server side hitboxes for vehicles, which you can see when you shoot at the helo with pods and must aim behind the model (the graphical hits don't register as hit, but the ones that go under/behind the helo actually do), same as bf3.
The problem the videos with strafing and shooting (both in the one I posted and you posted) is because of BF being a projectile based game vs Q3/CS being ray-traced game. The game or server just doesn't compensate correclty for the origin of projectile creation in regards to the hitbox.
HL engine has the same flaw (or even worse) which can be seen in mods where projectile is created server side (PVK maybe?).
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
