Cross play selection on PC?
Is there a reason the people on PC don't get an option to turn cross play off? The new goated aim assist on console makes me not even want to play right now. These guys are not missing. people sittin...
Forum Discussion
copy pasting from my conversation with ForgottenName25 G1ZMO16
Most of console players believe pc players are cheating when reality they just changed to controller on pc with better system latency. There is a lot of cheaters, but when pro players change to controller or system in general with a controller. You know that it's not a cheating issue, it's aim aissist issue.
I have met one cheater on bf6 after 200 hours into the game, just one.
Edit: I also want to point out that majority of console players dont actually know how much system latency they actually have with console, bluetooth and non premium tv with 60hz, vsync for motion smoothness. You can get up to combined 100+ in system/display latency with an average console setup. I play on 11-13 in system latency, I have almost 10x faster system latency than most people on console. Here you have nvidia themselves talk about how latency works.
Link 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h69JR51pZbU
Link 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muvToLXJSks
PC games shouldn't have aim assist. There should be full controller support, but that doesn't mean giving anyone code to have less recoil or track enemies.
Crossplay is a problem because it lets developers and players adopt this attitude that it's okay to "level" the playing field by giving only one input assistance. Which is insane logic and nothing about that is fair.
Interesting you bring up system latency for Consoles. I die instantly to most Console players in both 2042 and BF6. My running theory is that the networking was designed to put PC players behind Console players a tick or two on the server. There is more latency on Consoles, a lot of them do use TVs, use wireless controllers, some on wifi, and yet they have what feels like sub 50ms reactions times? Or the other typical thing that happens is I take damage before I can even see their full character model.
It was just way too consistent in 2042 to not be built into the game somehow. BF6 feels a bit more fair, but the movement is slower and the aim assist has been tuned down a bit.
Here's the amount of assist that Dice was willing to acknowledge in 2042:
- Reduced recoil and spread by 30% (just like BF6)
- Slow down over target (BF6 as well)
- Sticky aim (BF6 as well. Dice lied about this one. "No rotational assist".)
- Rotational aim (The only difference between this and sticky, is this turns your character towards enemies rather than just your reticle. Functionally, they're the same in my book. 2042 was faster and it's not needed in BF6, nor beneficial, so not to be more fair, it's just not needed. Dice are little f'ing liars on this one.)
- Snap to target (At this point, are you even playing the game anymore?)
So from my perspective, it's not hard to believe Dice would be willing to make the networking more "fair" for Console players because they tend to have more latency. My only other theory is that Console players position aren't updated every tick, just every other or something like that to offset processing power. So PC players would be updating every tick, which is more demanding on their system, but Consoles would do much less. All I know from 1000's of hours in 2042, something felt way off, and it was too consistent to be a fluke. It was 100%, unequivocally built into the game. Dice can never defend this claim, because something is up. They did something. I dare anyone from Dice to refute this claim.
I totally agree with most, just aim assist is needed if crossplay is gonna be a thing. We need console players, because there isnt enough pc players to keep up old generations of games etc.
There's enough players. Did you see the numbers during the beta? The problem is that BF6 feels like a console game, it feels like it caters to them, so PC players either passed on it, or gave up on it after a few weeks.
Look at the popularity of FPS games on Steamcharts, you have CSGO, Apex, BF, PUBG, then you have Valorant. There's more than enough players on PC if they wanted to make a game for them. BF6 is closer to COD than it is to Arma, which is the opposite of what PC players are looking for from the countless threads I've read. Which is anecdotal, but the steamcharts kinda backs that up.
PC games can be more stable and have longer longevity if developers want to go for that. Console is just much easier short term, which the higher ups love that. They sure do love their money.
Featured Places
