Here we go again…default crossplay on

Its always PC players being mentioned when cheating comes up, but we know there are cheaters on both platforms. And I'd be willing to bet all my toes (all 13 of them 😂) that there is a very large number of cheaters on console using modded controllers. Dice needs to find a way to stop these losers from being able to use such devices. They've taken steps to combat cheaters on PC, but what have they done to stop these losers who play on console? I haven't heard a thing. 

If a console player had a recoil difference and/ or the ability to put macros on single firing weapons I get all warm and fuzzy inside knowing they can't see through walls and directly snap their aim to my ingame character.

The fact that I can still outwit someone using a third party controller device is why there's a massive difference. You can't hide from someone who can see everyone and/ or everything in the match.

Been playing on PC for almost 20 years. It's always been a cheating fest. If you're on consoles, disable crossplay, save yourself stress and time not wasted on cheaters.

If console games had an open graphical menu and console only crossplay, I would buy one. Would be relaxing.

ghostflux wrote:

That's an extremely easy question to answer. A bigger player pool means that it's much faster to matchmake and in addition to that, it can matchmake players into a larger variety of game modes and maps.

Let's put it differently then, why put an option to default on that the majority of the players would never toggle on if it would be off by default? From the various topics here on these boards as well as on the BF2042 boards it's clear that the majority PC players don't want to play with consoles because of aim assist and recoil reduction, and console players don't want to play with PC players due to hackers/cheaters, MnK and difference in FOV and framerates. So why keep forcing players who naturally don't want to play together? You're partially right about keeping an active player base for longer, but not for the reasons you mention. The only reason is so they can scale down the number of servers they need to have running later in the life cycle.

And trust me, I've switched crossplay off in BF2042 straight away after playing a few matches with it on to see if they got it right. Never to turn it on again. And if I could not find any matches any longer I'd stop playing the game instead of turning crossplay on.

Player retention does not depend on crossplay. Prior to Battlefield 2024 we've been playing multiplayer shooters for approximately 20 years without crossplay, it never has been an issue. In fact some of the older titles such as BF3, BF4 and BF1 kept an active player base on each platform independently for much longer than BF2042 ever will. The key for player retention is creating and maintaining a good game, not crossplay!

Crossplay is nice for some coop game that has no competitive elements, but in an FPS it will never work. I've seen it in CoD Warzone 1 and Battlefield 2042, it's impossible to balance these completely different ecosystems. And it therefore should be an option to toggle on for the niche group of players who want to play with a friend on another system.

ghostflux wrote:

That's an extremely easy question to answer. A bigger player pool means that it's much faster to matchmake and in addition to that, it can matchmake players into a larger variety of game modes and maps.

The problem is that players will be leaving a game that forces rivalization of completely different inputs and promises the impossible - balancing inputs. 

He said everything my friend, dice is a masochist can only

He said everything my friend, dice is a masochist can only

He said everything my friend, dice is a masochist can only

He said everything my friend,

The balance doesn't need to be perfect. It just needs to be good enough that it's not too noticeable. Battlefield is not a competitive game where there's a heavy emphasis on skill-based matchmaking, meaning you'll always play with some form of inequality in mind.

Let's put it differently then, why put an option to default on that the majority of the players would never toggle on if it would be off by default? 

That by itself doesn't tell you anything. People could be biased towards using whatever is default. It doesn't necessarily indicate a preference.

From the various topics here on these boards as well as on the BF2042 boards...

That's not how statistics work. Forums are not necessarily representative of the player base. Players on forums tend to be more vocal about their complaints, rather than expressing the things they do like.

So why keep forcing players who naturally don't want to play together?

You're not forcing the players if you can toggle it off using a simple switch. Remember, we are just talking about a default setting being enabled. For all those that do not care about cross play it improves the experience for all the reasons I've mentioned in my previous response.

 You're partially right about keeping an active player base for longer, but not for the reasons you mention.

This is not some kind of difficult logic to understand. If you can use a bigger pool to matchmake from, that most certainly keeps an active player base for longer. Matchmaking relies on a big pool to guarantee the best possible result. If you split the pools, you run into problems faster and that in turn may motivate more players to quit the game.

Prior to Battlefield 2024 we've been playing multiplayer shooters for approximately 20 years without crossplay, it never has been an issue.

Prior Battlefield games did not all rely on matchmaking. If you have a server browser and persistent servers, that completely changes the equation. However, you say it's not an issue, but if you go back to Battlefield 1, you certainly don't have the same amount of servers to choose from. That certainly degrades the experience, in terms of map selection, game mode selection and ping, even if you can still find a few servers to play on.