Global Conflict

ShadowRado wrote:Why is everyone hating so bad. If you don't like it don't play it. I think as long as they fix the problems we are golden!

I wouldn't consider this anywhere near the same thing as "hating." If you say "Lulz, CoD sucks" then you're hating. Refusing to play the game, or pay for it, until some of these issues are solved is just practical and conscientious consuming. Also, ♥ you, Blake.

Believe it or not, boycotts do work, and GC is important to EA/Dice. When you consider the various organized communities like GC, 21CW, LVL, and half a dozen more, you're looking at a significant set of organizations and players, and if all these groups were to act in concert to say the EA/Dice scheme of selling us severely premature games is NOT OK, then we would have a substantial effect.

But, so far it looks pretty dreary for the patches, they have so far seemed very ineffective.

I'm not a hater, I like the game, and it would be great if it had just been patched and is 90% more stable, but it hasn't happened, and it doesn't look like it'll happen very soon.

Also, this whole thing about 'A game company can't possibly code for every hardware configuration' is just silly. You're right in a certain way, but this complexity is why they run test periods on a wider range of hardware such as ALPHAS and BETAS. Also, game development is about producing cross-platform code, they have systems of macros and compiler optimizations... If each graphics card had it's own version of DirectX of OpenGL, then yeah that might be a problem, but that's absurd and it's not the case.

I wish I had a job where I could fail to make something that works, and not be held accountable for it and still make loads of money.

If GC was truly important to DICE/EA, one of our representatives would have been sent to play in London just like Level. We are a community on the fringe of the action (not to say that doesn't have its merits), not the "bee's knees".

Kismet wrote:I wish I had a job where I could fail to make something that works, and not be held accountable for it and still make loads of money.

You haven't looked at the government sector. Its the fastest expanding job with premium benefits and only requires playing politics.

Our importance to EA/Dice is directly proportional to our reach via social media, and yes clearly Level is far more visible, that's not an impossible level for us to aspire to. Not to mention we can influence Level players and vice versa to take coordinated action.

My point is we have leverage as we are an organized group, and not just random pub players. We have the potential for concerted action. I don't mean we should demand ransoms.

I'm not here to influence Dice/EA. Just bitch about them. Even then, I still chose to lower my standards and buy the game when it went on sale.

I'd probably fly out, meet them and say pretty flower Baghdad Bob things for their marketing if they paid for it. They pay a lot more for their Baghdad Bobs in marketing than actually making a game. I am a whore in that way. "There was this one time where I actually killed people and the server crashed! You must buy all EA products! ZSQUIRT!"

Truth is, I am having decent fun. Very frustrating with the crashes, but I seem to still play.

yeah i totally understand these complaints and i have one major concern and its not about the bugs as much as it is about GC ... are we going to have the stability we need to carry out a decent campaign or do we need to consider putting BF4 C1 on hold for a couple of weeks and see if some issues get fixed? might be a prudent move at this point or were libel to run into some grievances in our own community as to the battleday results. we could test it on some BO days after patches but i think were in for a real bitch-fest if we try a battleday under these current issues.

There is talk about delaying the campaign (not sure for how long) given the server instability. I'm still waking up so I'm unsure where the thread's located... *yawn*

There's also talk about a possible patch coming today (Monday) and another assessment will be made regarding a potential delay.

insanityrocks wrote:There is talk about delaying the campaign (not sure for how long) given the server instability. I'm still waking up so I'm unsure where the thread's located... *yawn*

There's also talk about a possible patch coming today (Monday) and another assessment will be made regarding a potential delay.

There's some discussion about a possible week delay (or longer) but last I heard it's not concrete yet. Let's hope for a patch and see, if we get one, where it brings us.

Here are the latest server fixes. Haven't tested it yet to see if I still crash or not. My guess it that this will be fixed soon, we should keep the timeline as it is for now.

senor azul was faster

fingers crossed!

From what I read:
RC6 was a step into the right direction. Statistically less crashes for most. However, the is still a memory leak causing servers to crash after 2-3h.

Apparently they rolled out today the 7th server fix, which should help with the crashes. Does anyone have any feedback if it indeed ceased the crashes?

http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf4/fo ... 944685108/

just experienced a server crash.
and then client crash during loading between maps.

I don't think GC (or level for that matter) are that important to DICE. Just look at the problem that the gunglitch caused, had this happened on all public servers it would have definitely been fixed. I wouldn't even be surprised to see the gunglitch show up since a lot of the glitches that are in BF3 are still present.
It is understandable with more than ~95 percent playing on public servers.