Dice, you need to be more transparent

---

@online_bully wrote:

---

@Adamonic wrote:

---

@ATFGunr wrote:
@RaginSamOh and the 45hz servers do not help at all. That’s a major contributing factor. It’s still ridiculous that they rent 45hz servers.

---

This honestly is so much of the problems with this game. If we could just get to 60Hz, it would feel like night and day. Just to serve last-gen consoles, that was the max they could go (normally 30Hz for last gen, so they hedged between 60Hz for PC and 30Hz for last gen). That is also why things are so weird for crossplay.

I would love a Portal option for 60Hz that excludes last-gen consoles. That is all I would play. 

---

This game doesn't feel better than Apex Legends which runs on 20 hz servers and that game is "competitive." I doubt EA would be willing to invest in better servers on a game like Battlefield nor would it provide much tangible benefit even if they did.

---

I'm not sure if Apex is a great example either. It's a BR and it has hit reg issues as well.

60hz would definitely improve the feel of 2042. People who play games like CSGO where you can have servers ranging from 64-128, players claim they can feel the difference. The higher the refresh, the more accurate the game will feel. The cost is that it takes more CPU power for the player.

It's a complex issue, one that I don't have a deep understanding of. Big companies will have a person, or even a team of specialist working on just that element of a game. So I don't think it can be reduced to just increasing the server tick, but it would definitely make the game feel better. It's just not everything.