|
|
 |
| [Oct 02, 2011, 2:22 pm ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
BF3Blog has word that some servers have popped up for the Battlefield 3 beta allowing 128-player games. The servers are apparently running the Operation Metro map, but rather than offering the 32-player rush mode like the official servers, they are running a hacked version of conquest mode, allowing 128 players rather then the intended 64. The bad news is that this is, rather unsurprisingly, a "considerably" laggy experience, and worse, they pass along Electronic Arts' warning that playing on hacked servers may compromise your EA account, and may earn you a ban, which can cause you to lose access to your other EA games.
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 89. |
Re: Hacked 128-Player Battlefield 3 Beta Servers |
Oct 4, 2011, 01:09 |
Bhruic |
|
|
Well, for one, the game is probably gold already. The game comes out this month so the console versions have already been submitted for certification.
True enough, but the probability of a day 1 patch is almost 100%. The days of going gold being a stop to bug fixing are long past.
I highly doubt they're going to make any significant design changes
Beta testing has never been about significant design changes. It's about finding bugs and fixing them.
In addition, the beta test is focusing on Rush mode, when Conquest is inevitably going to be the more popular mode. It will also be the more complex mode and thus have more bugs, which is why this beta should be focusing on that instead of Rush.
Two factors there. First off, they aren't focused on testing game modes, they are testing the engine and the networking. Which mode the beta is using isn't really a relevant issue. Second, I can't see any reason to suggest that Conquest mode is any more "complex", unless they've made significant changes to it that I'm unaware of. Conquest in BC2 was a simpler game mode - albeit not substantially - because there were no objects to be interacted with. Conquest is all about being within a cap zone.
Map-wise, they certainly could have picked something with more details - vehicles and such - but they've apparently decided that that's not something that needed as extensive testing. They have, in fact, been testing both vehicles and Conquest mode, just in a closed fashion (on the passworded 64 man servers).
About 0.001% of players will actually look for bugs, try to find consistent repro steps and then submit the bug to the devs.
Granted, but that's actually an argument against your position. That's why they need to have a large open beta, because it's the only way to ensure that they get enough people posting bugs. Anything smaller, and the 0.001% (really, only 1 out of 100,000 people look for bugs?) would be too few people to spot and report them.
The vast majority of players are simply using the beta as a demo
That's what the players use it for. But that's not what Dice is using it for. If all they wanted was a demo, they could have made a demo. And they almost certainly would have made it a demo of a more compelling facet of the game (Conquest mode, for one).
which is why EA used it to promote pre-orders and MoH sales
It's something that they perceive as a benefit, certainly. But what I don't understand is how you are trying to use that as an argument against. Using a beta to promote a product is not mutually exclusive with its role as a beta test.
The fact that players have been finding major bugs without even trying is pretty worrisome at this stage of development, as betas are supposed to be pretty polished.
I agree that it'd be nice if there were less apparent bugs in the game. Whether or not that is something to worry about for the release is something we won't know for certain for 3 weeks. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
.. ..
Copyright © 1996-2013 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.
Twitter 
