Hit Registration
Hit registration is the worst that it's been since beta. How have reviews gone up for this game?
Forum Discussion
@UP_LordPlumber
When I see these kinds of things, I suspect I was already dead according to the server. And my inputs were being ignored.
When I see these kinds of things, I suspect I was already dead according to the server. And my inputs were being ignored.
@sk1lld wrote:
@UP_LordPlumber
When I see these kinds of things, I suspect I was already dead according to the server. And my inputs were being ignored.
From that picture, that's exactly what happened. This happens to me all the time.
There seems to be a big discrepancy between what you see and what other players see at times. I wished that Dice would explain what's causing that to happen instead of telling us that it's been "fixed" in this upcoming patch.
I've played plenty of other games with much lower tick rates and they didn't feel as off as BF2042 does at times.
The other day I took damage before actually peeking the corner. I ran up to it like I was going to peek, stopped, and took damage while being completely behind cover. My guess is that it has something to do with some sort of server prediction? Or maybe the server thought I did go beyond the wall, and the tick updates are just too spread out to be accurate? It was really weird.
Dice had to sacrifice a lot to get that 128 player count. I have a feeling that there is something off with how players (client side) report themselves to the servers. Like it's not synced up well? With some players it's noticeably much worse. It's not as precise as it should be.
- @RaginSamI think it was @Anobix who was pointing out the 45hz servers and the firing rate of different weapons earlier in this thread. I don’t think that opinion is gaining enough traction. As I understood it, the server updates being longer than the firing rates allow shots to be completely unrecorded by the game. Our actions are literally being inhibited by the low end servers. You can move and shoot all you want, but if it’s in the microseconds between server updates then it isn’t recognized as having happened. It’s insanity. Maybe Anobix will add a more educated comment than mine and expand on his earlier words.
@ATFGunrYour shots get ignored when the server decided that the other player hit you first, and that you died. On your screen, you may have shot more after that point, but the server goes backs and checks that. I wouldn't say that shots are being ignored, more like they get revised because if you were dead, you shouldn't be able to shoot? I feel like there's something off with lag compensation, or something with how players and servers are communicating the updates to each other. There's a bit of discrepancy with that.
Keep in mind that there's what your game is reporting to you, which is not bound to the 45 tick rate server. Then there's the server checking every 22ms to see if that's true. At least that's my understanding.
Higher tick rates definitely help a lot with how a game will feel. I totally agree with everyone saying that 60hz or higher would be fantastic for 64 player maps. I don't think that's a realistic expectation for 128 players though. I think that would use too much CPU?
There's a lot to networking, and there's all sorts of knobs Dice can't twist and turn. I'd like to know why it's so bad at times, and how it could be fixed in the future.
@RaginSam wrote:@ATFGunrYour shots get ignored when the server decided that the other player hit you first, and that you died. On your screen, you may have shot more after that point, but the server goes backs and checks that. I wouldn't say that shots are being ignored, more like they get revised because if you were dead, you shouldn't be able to shoot? I feel like there's something off with lag compensation, or something with how players and servers are communicating the updates to each other. There's a bit of discrepancy with that.
Keep in mind that there's what your game is reporting to you, which is not bound to the 45 tick rate server. Then there's the server checking every 22ms to see if that's true. At least that's my understanding.
Higher tick rates definitely help a lot with how a game will feel. I totally agree with everyone saying that 60hz or higher would be fantastic for 64 player maps. I don't think that's a realistic expectation for 128 players though. I think that would use too much CPU?
There's a lot to networking, and there's all sorts of knobs Dice can't twist and turn. I'd like to know why it's so bad at times, and how it could be fixed in the future.I'd have to hope that with the current generation consoles that 60hz+ would be possible for 128. Maybe not on old-gen [but they don't have access to 128 anyway]. Unless it is server-side CPU that would be hit too hard, which sounds like a pretty lame excuse, to be honest, considering in previous games with community servers you could have 100tick servers with 64 players.
Or ultimately, 128 was a mistake, but they kept the settings the same for ease instead of making 64 player play better than 128 by having extra hz.
