Same map 3 times in a row. Seriously ?
I now have 20h of playtime (all conquest), and I think that 50% of this was done on Renewal. I already had multiple times this map 2 times in a row, but yesterday evening set a record : 3 times !! On...
Forum Discussion
@OzzLink wrote:Well then next release ppl will save money by not buying into their next title. I know I will and they lost more than one customer. Who thought about this MM system has no clue about multiplayer games or he's completely ignorant about this market and should stop designing multiplayer games.This is exactly the reason I stop playing every time I launch this poor excuse of a game. You play the 1st round (if you are lucky and dont get matched into an already ending game) and the next map is the same one(again if you're lucky and dont get match again into an already ending game). For me that's an instant ALT F4 and all my mood is gone.
The reason we now have match making is because this game was designed first and foremost as a BR title. For such a game, only MM makes sense and there is no need for persistent servers. I don't see a problem with that, IFF! the game had come out as a BR game. In which case I would have simply ignored it and would still be playing BF5.
The problem comes after they started to try to make this a Battlefield game without realizing that for this to work we NEED persistent servers and a map rotation and the ability to 'stick together' as a squad (and also with more than just 4 players) over many matches. Why this was overlooked is really beyond me. As if the people designing this game did not play any of the previous titles of their own franchise.
And as if this is not bad enough, they now even refuse to bring this essential feature to the game. They even do not comment on that, despite being asked for this time and time again. There is only one conclusion: they want the game to die as fast as possible. I am open to any other explanation, but I'm afraid that there is none.
@DuaneDibbley
Yeah agreed, launching the game without persistent servers / map rotation was bad enough, refusing to admit the error and implement it was the next big mistake.
Refusing to even talk about it just totally frustrates the community, and it all could have been avoided if they had just stuck with the long standing formula from previous BF's.
Yeah agreed, launching the game without persistent servers / map rotation was bad enough, refusing to admit the error and implement it was the next big mistake.
Refusing to even talk about it just totally frustrates the community, and it all could have been avoided if they had just stuck with the long standing formula from previous BF's.
- @Adamonic It's only in Portal because, by design, it has to have a browser. Otherwise, how could someone find a game you are hosting?
Believe me, if they could remove the server browser in Portal to save $$$$, they would. This company is as unethical as they come. Youre presuming youre the root map count. Let us say there are 5 maps. Is the rotation a random 20%, or is it sequential.
If it is sequential, you just happen to be joining when that maps time is up.
If it is percentage, there is always a base 20% chance. People many times incorrectly believe that repetitive chance increases odds. That is not necessarily true with base random generation.
this is still a problem due to the game finding mechanism.
from player perspective : I want to choose which map I rather play on, and never ever there should be a map 3 times in a row or an unliked map 2 times in a row, which sadly happens often
the old classic server browsers had this advantage to choose your map, why not here? a quick find system is always possible to sideline with a server browser
Featured Places
