Does anyone know, from a purely cost POV, the difference between a MM system vs Persistent Servers? I understand that regional servers have been an issue for EA in previous BF games, so is this just a way to aggregate players and reduce costs?
Back in the days when I played on PC, rented servers were very popular. Obviously, at no extra cost to EA.
What is the case on Console? I'm guessing that EA need to provide those. This would be a consideration to game companies as Consoles continue to grow at the expense of PC.
Imho unless DICE get rid of MM in AOW the BF franchise as we know it will be damaged beyond repair.
I tried getting into Kaleidoscope map a earlier this afternoon and it timed out waiting for players and I am in the UK.
BF2042 is definitely on life support and MM is making matters so much worse and needs replacing urgently.
@Sc0tch_Whiskey wrote:
@RayD_O1Can’t get into a match again. But checked and the player count is 1,707 according to steam only. Spread that out to all the modes available and I can see why you can’t get Into a match.
Yeah as you rightly say the figures speak for themselves don't they. ☹️
I would never have forecast this rate of decline for a BF title after only three months,
DICE have a major job on their hands to save this title and the sooner they spell out their roadmap for BF2042 the better, before it's too late.!
@Lancelot_du_Lac wrote:
@OskooI_007 so it would seem that MM is probably a part of the business case for developing BF2042, in addition to the strategy of tapping into the some of the Fortnite/Apex player base
@Lancelot_du_Lac conversely the business case for returning to the more expensive persistent servers is in the current player count. I think EA/DICE completely misread the community's likely reaction to a number of formula changes to the franchise and most likely suffered internal confirmation bias as to why they thought changes like this would be accepted by the community.
@ragnarok013 wrote:
@Lancelot_du_Lac wrote:
@OskooI_007so it would seem that MM is probably a part of the business case for developing BF2042, in addition to the strategy of tapping into the some of the Fortnite/Apex player base@Lancelot_du_Lacconversely the business case for returning to the more expensive persistent servers is in the current player count. I think EA/DICE completely misread the community's likely reaction to a number of formula changes to the franchise and most likely suffered internal confirmation bias as to why they thought changes like this would be accepted by the community.
Very true, how anyone in their right mind ever thought they could sell BF2042 in it's current guise is beyond me.
It's like they took the blueprint of what BF stood for and shredded it. !!
I am not exactly sure who they thought BF2042 would appeal to as it's neither one thing or the other and it has ended up pleasing virtually no one judging by the player population stats.
BF2042 never gives me that feeling of "just one more round", I am currently struggling to get the enthusiasm to go in and play at all.
It's all fairly soulless imho, too little content, too many missing features, too much time wasted in menus & lobbies etc.....
As I said I don't really know why they made the decision to go down this route but I do know it has backfired big style.
@OskooI_007 wrote:Amazon's AWS website breaks down the cost of running dedicated vs on-demand servers.
Cost of continuously running servers $36,270 Cost w/Autoscaling and On-Demand $18,150 50% savings over continuously running servers Cost w/Auto Scaling and Spot (estimated) $5,430 85% savings over continuously running servers EA is saving at least 50% using on-demand servers vs continuously running dedicated servers. They save even more if on-demand spot servers are available, which is unused server capacity Amazon offers at a discount.
https://aws.amazon.com/gamelift/pricing/
It's no wonder EA loves the new matchmaking system where servers are shut down at the end of every round.
I do t think it’s that simple though. I don’t see any reason why what those servers are doing when up and running couldn’t be MM or Dedicated servers.
Or some other configuration I.e a mix.
you can scale servers in all sorts of ways. And quite often th price is also broken down into pending and active. I.e based on how much bandwidth is being used.
also you tend to have to outlay a lot of money upfront when dealing with large numbers like BF. So your already talking dedicated servers farms to your business.
basically cost might play.a part in it. But it really shouldn’t
