EA BF6 Caters to Console!!

This 100% - Plus theres times when PC Player and maybe console, or at least me (in gaunlet or Redsec) will get the drop on someone, put 20-30 bullets, all hit markers, then get killed from a Controller player the just turned and 3-4 hit you. 

worst thing about catering to console is the controls for vehicles are trash  especially aircraft. the control from bf 3-4 are best.

Not having the ability to disable crossplay is wrecking havoc in BF6.  When I get killed by a PC, I feel I'm usually the one that screwed up.  When I get killed by a consolebot, it's because they hipfire sprayed across the map and my brain must be magnetic because every bullet hit.  It's almost always just an absolute BS death.

Or like you say, you hit them with about 4 mags, 3 RPG shots, 2 tank shells, land a helo on them, run them over with an ATV, unload 4 more mags into them, the kitchen sink even goes flying in... and then you die, and after which they turn around and shoot 2 bullets that must be made from some magical time travel voodoo mystery metal.

Insanity.

Yet there are 100s screenshots of the battlefield 6 scoreboard. Google type battlefield 6 scoreboard click images and youll see hundreds if not thousands of screenshots that show consoles aim assist is not dominating bf6 at all. 

Sadly most game devs do cater more to console now than pc. Why? Because devs know whats in all the consoles. Do they know what all the pc players have in their rigs? Nope. So why cater to PC anymore. If it works for both consoles. Than PC players can change settings that consoles cant.

Just watched a few videos about this pc vs console on reddit. How can console compete with this...is the title. He was wrecking everyone. Ill turn off cross-platform on my console every match. But id happily go up against a console vs my pc.

You cant beat that fps difference between 60(console) to upto 500(PC).

Console ➕️ TV < PC ➕️ Monitor. The performance just isnt there for console. My pc is liquid cooled. Consoles are not. Temps are everything.

I get none of the aimbot, lock on, auto aim you THINK controller players have. When I ads it doesn't snap to target. When I'm shooting someone and they move, my reticle stays where I was shooting, it does not follow the player. The only aim assist I notice at all is nerfed recoil. And yes, if there was zero controller aim assist, every controller player WOULD get torched by PC players, BECAUSE IT'S WAY EASIER TO AIM AND CONTROL RECOIL WITH A MOUSE!

If you're putting 20-30 shots into a player and they turn around and kill you in 3 shots, what you're describing is a netcode/hit reg problem, not a controller aim assist issue.

I've been snapped onto many times by controllers. This happens so fast and I'm dead in a blink of an eye. Maybe it's an illegal modded controller, I do not know, but it happens. And if it's "way easier to aim and control recoil with a mouse" as you say, then why don't you use one? Not trying to argue, just curious. Thing is, how is it even possible for ANY controller player to do well in Battlefield, if it's as bad as some of you claim it to be on controller? I watched a friend's 14-year-old daughter recently play a match on his Xbox, and guess what, she had nearly 50 kills and very few deaths. And she doesn't even play these types of games. So, when I hear some of you claiming it's so difficult on controller, I have to call BS. Is it possible that some of you are simply bad at the game? If so, you can't blame the peripheral for that. That's simply a skill issue. Not a peripheral issue.

Personally, I do not believe aim assist or any other controller assisting nonsense should be allowed in FPS games. None! You ruin fair play when you allow that type of stuff to pollute the game. It's basically cheating. And I do not care how strong or weak it is, if it's there and you are using it, you are cheating. There are a lot of us who do not like our games being polluted with such nonsense. If this type of stuff is to be allowed with controllers, then there should at least be an option to avoid them.

I miss the days of an aim-assist-free Battlefield! The days when everyone relied on REAL SKILL to play the game using a M&K. 😒

Here are two recent screenshots from two different matches I joined already in progress. Just look at the K/D of some of those poor controller players. Poor, poor, souls! Aim assist is badly broken, I see. No, some of you just aren't good at the game! It's not the controller!

I've been building gaming rigs for more than a couple of decades. Heat is NOT everything when it comes to a console. Consoles are already scaled down to maintain a target frame rate and heat dissipation is absolutely top priority when game and console developers release their products. This does also include texture streaming, post processing effects, bloom (light softening, spreading) shadow quality, antialiasing, lower anisotropic texture filtering, etc., you get the picture. Put your console in high fidelity mode and come back when you start to see artifacting on your TV/monitor due to overheating. Heat is absolutely a factor for PCs regardless if it is liquid cooled or not as it begins to degrade and bottleneck not only the CPU but the RAM, VRAM, GPU, and potentially the SSD all at once. Just one bottleneck can affect frame rate in a negative way. While PC's have a lot more visually aesthetic options available, it can be to our own detriment. We choose the option of high fidelity of a PC. My Alienware 4070 runs BF6 with some "insane" settings at no less than 90 fps and heat is never a problem and this does NOT give me a competitive edge over consoles. The game is well optimized for consoles but PC's get a great benefit from it as well.

PC's get resolution scaling as an option to use and one of the most over-used but underperforming features is frame generation. I can play a game at 50 FPS on my PC and use frame-gen to double it but the consequence is input latency; visual and felt input lag. This is well documented and disputed. I won't run with it enabled on BF6 for favor of a more snappy response time. We already have a hard time with dsync against console players. Many of us have recorded console players seeming to stutter-step ahead or behind our aim reticle once we manage to get a registered hit marker from both the client and server side hit registry. Google that and you'll be closer to understanding the problem with crossplay.

To your overexaggerated example, 500fps on a PC will not give you an edge over 60 fps when the systems calculate graphics completely differently. Anything over the monitor or TV's refresh rate (in Hz) may and often does create screen tearing which is worse than a dip in refresh rate as half the screen is a few frames ahead or behind the other half, split horizontally. Dig into overhead, threading, and background processes on PC vs Console. The big difference is that console has little to no overhead compute because the OS is tailored to just gaming where as PC's are versatile platforms capable of many things on the OS. Consoles are streamlined for this purpose. Any PC gaming rig builder understands the balance between frame rate, frame sync, and frame fluctuation. You will find top streamers playing on low settings because they don't want their FPS bottoming out when they are trying to perform well. They do not care about peak FPS. Most of the time they force a frame LIMIT to prevent screen tearing. That console was designed to maintain a steady FPS by sacrificing fidelity and matching TV refresh rates because console players only want to/can afford a stand alone gaming system. You're comparing pineapples to zucchinis.

Also, screenshots are easier to take and post on a PC platform. You're going to see more screenshots where the source is from a PC player. Your Google search looks for images wherever they may be. Duh.

EA should have shipped separate PC and Console versions and not doubled-down on their crossplay goals from 2042.

I've recorded a round where I was on the attacker side on the Manhattan Bridge map where I flanked and was above and behind someone corner camping a low wall. Using a well equipped carbine and no less than 2 meters away, I shot with little to no chance of missing due to the close distance and counted 12, that's TWELVE hit markers on a weapon that kills in 5 bullets up close and 6 at medium range to be turned on and killed in 3 bullets by the same player I was shooting using an LMG. The death screen showed he had a little less than half health. That means out of the 12 (twelve) shots that registered on my side (client), only 3 registered on the server. The TTD on my side was instant.

Yeah, there is a really big problem with hit detection between both clients and the server. If playing with console players is potentially the issue, DICE should give us the OPTION to disable crossplay if we want AND support PC to PC matchmaking. 

The fact you can actually tell by the rapid sound of all bullets hitting you in the same spot and you just being deleted, that is was a consoul player says it all (yes I check and yes its always confirmed). They also as stated above, just rin and hipfire weapons with high recoil and still manage to land every bullet. They are not scared to push objectives because they know they will win most gun fight when reaction speed and getting on target matters. Also disturning is they also now seem to be able to lock on with sniper rifles from 100+ meters away, which is tbh the final straw, im so bored of playing vs legal aim bots and having no choice, BF6 was a PC game and now im close to quitting because your catering to console who could just go buy a ms/kb if the controller was so bad.