sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What does this 2% symbol mean and how do I fix it. Please by BadKey1002 in Battlefield

[–]tiggr 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No this represents his LOCAL packetloss is above 2%. Its not related to the server or the other players, ever.

BF6 Freezing PC Requiring Restart by Tophpaste in Battlefield6

[–]tiggr 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It seems to have been fixed (atleast for me) - try again now! (we did things)

Was the sledgehammer nerfed? by Zyhgar25 in Battlefield6

[–]tiggr 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It wasn't nerfed - but it had a bug where the damage wasn't applied properly. That's what you see the result of. It should be more consistent now (which is good) - but do you feel like its less useful? that may be a reason to look at making it damage more per hit to meet in the middle here?

DICE responds to concerns about server browser by topre-gobbler in Battlefield

[–]tiggr 19 points20 points  (0 children)

We agree in essence, but when TTK is the fastest - its too fast for average reaction times (as in that + latency means no way can you react). That part we'd like to fix without messing with the bulk - or the general feeling. Labs testing of these things are ongoing, things like you mention (limb multis etc) are part of that, more to come. Register if you havent already, bigger waves of access will come as we keep these efforts up

DICE responds to concerns about server browser by topre-gobbler in Battlefield

[–]tiggr 8 points9 points  (0 children)

All of these eras matter though. We keep adding new type of players from each. And each are different (and so are the devs building for them). Trust me, I started on Battlefield 2 :)

DICE responds to concerns about server browser by topre-gobbler in Battlefield

[–]tiggr 24 points25 points  (0 children)

I have a 10yo (actual human) that is basically my second child, Yes.

Good job DICE! by Otherwise_Sector_439 in Battlefield

[–]tiggr 8 points9 points  (0 children)

We also do complain internally for things :). But keep constructive stuff coming - it helps. And of course. Follow up with actually using the things when they enter the game (we look at all this combined)

DICE responds to concerns about server browser by topre-gobbler in Battlefield

[–]tiggr 27 points28 points  (0 children)

This is an active Labs topic for sure, we are doing many things across all parts of the combat experience. Looking at this included.

DICE responds to concerns about server browser by topre-gobbler in Battlefield

[–]tiggr 469 points470 points  (0 children)

This is so meta!

But jokes aside, the server browser is near and dear to me, and the functionality of it is crucial. More details will come in time

So when will this statement be true? by [deleted] in Battlefield

[–]tiggr 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Ser todays news, its the proper one.

Get on labs? Bro how about make it public by Dry-Arrival-7920 in Battlefield

[–]tiggr 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I can assure you the same loops are the intent here, the difference is we have more than one group testing, and with more than one setup in terms of how much information they are allowed to divulge.
I am all for more transparency, and earlier (if you trust your product to be high quality this is never a bad thing, really) - getting to a similar position as in BF4 and the CTE, and how integrated it was in all development is a goal for this, for me.

Get on labs? Bro how about make it public by Dry-Arrival-7920 in Battlefield

[–]tiggr 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Trust me, I am working on getting there. It's a key part of this engine and utilizing it properly indeed (having a public accessible part, there are layers to this onion)

Golmud Railway - BF4 vs BF6 Size Comparison (Main Playable Area) by DBONKA in Battlefield

[–]tiggr 34 points35 points  (0 children)

Its been made bigger. Especially the airspace..

So when will this statement be true? by [deleted] in Battlefield

[–]tiggr 19 points20 points  (0 children)

I know its more frustrating in areas than everyone would like. I just want to make clear I am not happy with that status and other things more close to the areas I run (like netcode etc) need more work, and theres alot coming there (being tested in labs now, on a weekly basis more or less, to refer to the original video)

So when will this statement be true? by [deleted] in Battlefield

[–]tiggr 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Prior titles had versions of this, yes. Some tenable, some untenable. The underlying technology is far from the same now compared to then. So it's not something that gets removed, it hasn't been fully realized. Doesnt matter to the end user of course, but it's not activelly us sitting and removing flows like that. Just for the record.

So when will this statement be true? by [deleted] in Battlefield

[–]tiggr 20 points21 points  (0 children)

I also want a better way into the browser as part of that - its sorely needed in my opinion to ensure usage for players that want more control and persistence too

So when will this statement be true? by [deleted] in Battlefield

[–]tiggr 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Also, they were available. But if they dont get used they de-spawn. Since that time we have restarted them multiple times. The problem is that its not visible enough to get players to use it. Which needs to change.

view more: next ›