It’s more than a simple step up from the original born from high-end 4K console hardware; it’s a revelation.
PlayStation VR2 Review - The Best VR Gaming to Date?
Combat in Horizon has always been fast and tactical, and in Horizon Call of the Mountain, that’s still the case - except redesigned for VR.
Horizon Call of the Mountain Review
The combat is shaping up to be some of the most fun gore-filled action you’re likely to see in 2023.
Dead Island 2 Preview - Hands-On in HELL-A
We take a look at the 10 best games to utilise the tropes, tone and mythos of H.P. Lovecraft. Check it!
The Top 10(tacled) Lovecraftian Videogames
Post by Eorl @ 10:26am 26/04/14 | 14 Comments
Battlefield 4 developer EA DICE deployed new servers this week to address rubber-banding, one of the shooter's most persistent and annoying issues, the studio announced today.

DICE mentioned earlier this month that the team planned to upgrade Battlefield 4's servers because it was "unhappy" with the performance as far as rubber-banding was concerned. The recent release of the game's third expansion, Naval Strike, seemed to further increase this problem. According to DICE, the root cause was "a configuration of certain hardware types dedicated to 64-player matches," which is only available to PC, PlayStation 4 and Xbox One users.

This week's server upgrade is aimed at fixing the rubber-banding problems. DICE said today that it did a lot of testing before rolling out the new hardware to make sure it actually addresses rubber-banding, and that performance has already been improved since its introduction.

"While the process took longer than we would've liked, we wanted to be 100 percent sure it was done right and that the long-term solution was properly in place," said Karl Magnus Troedsson, vice president and general manager of DICE. Last month, the studio indicated that fixing Battlefield 4's netcode was one of its "top priorities."

What are your thoughts on Battlefield 4? Still facing problems since launching in October last year? Let us know in the comments below!

battlefield 4diceserver issuesrubber-banding
Buy now from Only AUD$16.49!
(compare all prices)

Latest Comments
Posted 10:36am 26/4/14
The gameplay is total dogs breakfast crap.
Played it the other night after having not played since china rising.
Took all of 20 minutes before I realised why I stopped in the first place.
It feels like a game designed for ADHD children, too much s*** going on everywhere and pretty much everyone has a counter for everything.

Need more in the Bad Company series. It had the right balance of vehicle numbers and threats from vehicles (and threats from infantry if you were in the vehicle).
Posted 11:17am 26/4/14
yeah totally agree, played for about 2 weeks then stopped for same reasons as well as the game getting my cpu hot to compete with nuclear fusion.
tbh to me ever since bf3 it looks like they are trying to get cod players or something? also the graphics are unbelievably s*** for this aaa title; i dont remember cardboard cutout trees and s*** been the norm.
Posted 11:24am 26/4/14
I generally only play 48 or 32 large conquest so I haven't had pretty much any rubber banding. Bug how ever have been left and right.
Posted 01:49pm 26/4/14
yeah the grahics are s***...and its COD like. Really? What settings are you playing on? Or what large scope 3A game gets the graphics tick and doesn't have character movements like Arma? Please tell me as I want to play them.
Posted 02:55pm 26/4/14
well i really enjoy Battlefield 4. There parts that are really annoying but overall i do love the game.
Posted 03:15pm 26/4/14
I only play on 64 player servers and I have not noticed much if any rubber-banding. Star Wars Galaxies, that had rubber-banding, worst I've seen. All aboard the b**** and moan train anyway, Choo choo.
Posted 04:19pm 26/4/14
well i really enjoy Battlefield 4. There parts that are really annoying but overall i do love the game.

I agree.
Posted 04:21pm 26/4/14
I still find it amazing that people b**** and moan about games. Games like BF4 are bloody amazing and can be the perfect game or close enough for some people as in my case (especially when they fix bugs and they work!)
Ok, they have issues, bugs or they might not be the type of game play you use to like. For example, I loved the old COD like vanilla and UO but they lost some of their appeal with modern versions for me. I loved the things like jumping over something and still being able to shoot at the same time. I don't b**** about modern vaulting animations even though they might look sweet, but to me its a negative to game play whilst to others in awesome cool. Hell vanilla cod people b****ed about vehicles, sprinting and cooked nades in UO ...I just loved both for what each was.
Now days I still buy new versions of games in the hope they are even better versions and sometimes even if they don't live up to expectations, they can still be beautiful in their own ways. I still buy every COD in the hope i will like it but I mostly dont enjoy them online much any more, so I always say ok, nice try, it looked ok, it worked, sort of, but its not for me and here's hoping the next one is better..
They just are different to what I want but if I like it then I play it and if I don't like it, I don't play it. Its fine to have things you want to change or talk about but what I would never do is b**** and moan on a open forum about a creative teams game that they put their heart and soul into making something I couldn't.
Posted 04:23pm 26/4/14
ITT people like different things and yell at each other about it
Posted 06:25pm 26/4/14
fencer if you really like BF4 that is fine for you, but if a game has glitches and bugs for the first 2 months after release then it is hardly a "perfect" game nor is it "close enough".
People who b**** and moan clearly have a higher standard than you...simply put.

For me, BF4 is OK. It feels like more of the same BF3 crap. The maps are generally better than BF3 and they have tweaked the anti vehicle warfare to be more balanced like it was in BC2, but the game just doesn't feel like anything new. It suffers from the same BF3 microlag, behind an object and then u get hit etc, which is pretty annoying even after you get used to it.

I have been saying since day 1, the issue with the rubberbanding was on DICEs and GSPs end...s*** aussie servers with s*** ancient technology. And DICE for not programming something better or telling GSPs how to fix it on their end.

Oh well, decent game...just a bit boring. Has become a bit more like COD and a bit better than BF3, but it isn't the demolition derby, 3 shot kill that was BC2. That game was hectic. I just don't get that in BF4. Everyone just runs to point, sets up prone camp position, takes point or holds point, and that's it.
No heroics with the last minute c4 building smashing exit! Just meh.
Posted 12:42am 27/4/14
Yeah right. B****ing and moaning is still b****ing and moaning. Using the excuse to boringly continue to b**** and moan because "I have higher standards" is still an excuse to simply just b**** and moan....really simply put. Go read any old thread on COD or BF and watch the boring wash and repeat hating b******. Just simply talking about a problem is a totally different thing to 80% of the standard whining s***.
Also funny this was, game worked fairly well for me right from the start, though I actually don't really play it much anymore, as I've gone back to RO/RS, as I like that game play a bit better.
Posted 05:32pm 27/4/14
Personally I really like BF4, but I don't really want to start playing it again until I get a better rig. Maps take too long to load on this and I get too much framerate stuttering :(
Posted 01:56pm 29/4/14
Frankly you're an idiot if you think this game is of acceptable quality.

The game is only lucky because it runs just well enough to have a fun factor Everything is there to be a better game than BF3 but the servers run like arse. What you're seeing is quite far off what is going on with the server end. Ever notice how at the end of a map you jump backwards. That's how disconnected you are from the server end.

You can be standing there someone in front of you firing. You're getting hit, hearing the sounds. Yet that person isn't even looking at you. As you can see that person isn't shooting at you, your natural reaction is to look around for the person that is and you die. As you die the game finally decides to update to show that person looking at you with muzzle flashes.

That is not acceptable.

Often you just instantly die with out indication. The game failed to send you the information about being shot at. Just that you died.

Recently there was a video by people showing how cover isn't consistent on peoples machines. So someone is behind cover. Yet to someone looking at them, the cover is no longer there and often that person is facing a different direction from where they actually are.

There's the death shield bug. Where when a player dies their hit blocks blocks projectiles for a few seconds after. Some reports even state depending on the angle it affects bullets.

Throwing a grenade, sometimes it flies away. Yet despite all indications if went away. It secretly bounced back and kills you. This also happens with out the death shield bug. Another indication of the server tracking different actions and positions inconsistently.

Rubber banding was just a little issue, all these other things, the fact that everything happens at inconsistent times, is what ruins the game.

I also find my aiming is off. I jump in BF3 and destroy, incredibly good aim. BF4 not so much. Turns out that your gun position frequently doesn't actually match where it's aiming. Which is probably a factor.

I could go on. There's so many things that are off, or don't work properly in this game. DICE has no intention of ever making the game beyond just being over the border of being playable.
Posted 02:20pm 29/4/14
All of the issues listed above are directly related to s***** netcode, or whatever term you want to use in its place. As everyone (the vast majority) has been saying since BF2, if they fix the netcode once and for all, BF would be extremely enjoyable for a far longer period of time. The fact they dilly dally around the point, and each patch uses terms like "should" (meaning it's still s***) - "tighten" (meaning it's still s***) - "minimise" (meaning it's still s***).

This isn't a jab from haters - most of these people are crying out for a more enjoyable experience, for everyone.


Much of the time wasted diagnosing these s***** problems is because they are far too busy monetising the system. Now you have to rent servers for comparably exorbitant prices, and RSP's need licenses etc. Why? "Oh, it's a ranked game and we need to maintain account security" or better yet "We like to keep control of what hardware our servers run on to maintain the best gaming experience!" - Hah, yeah..

It took months to work out (for the second time now) that 64 player servers need more CPU resources. It took them chumps that long to work this out? And you all pay these guys monthly for this s***? I am dissapoint.

If this game had the freedom to be hosted like any other games dedicated servers, people would have thrown top end resources at the game to diagnose problems. RSP's would have more breathing room, and the entire setup would cost us less. But as long as you chumps keep renting out 5 f*****g servers for yourself and 3-4 mates - they will keep this system going as long as possible. Lets face it, right now some of you have bought the game 20 times over in server fees. That's just retarded.
Commenting has been locked for this item.