Should BI offer official MP servers?

[fa7h3r 10]

I'm been reading about how connecting to a wrong server can bring a very bad MP experience in term of performance (FPS). I personally have a great performance when playing scenarios and everything related to SP but I haven't spend much time in MP yet.

I wonder if BI should start supporting some official dedicated servers where they can guarantee from the server perspective everything is fine tuned and provide a more enjoyable experience. Many games does have initial official servers until they figure things out, tweak to provide optimal performance, etc. Then, they offer the options to support custom servers but now with more detail data on how to run it.

With Arma 3 and the fact that everyone can setup a server in even low performance machines, the probability to play in these bad servers is very high. BI should make some proactive work on getting some good servers by their own.

[froggyluv 2136]

I'd go for sure. Gave up on looking for good servers years ago and the last really great time I had in MP was Arma1 Demo -because there were like 2 servers and they were always packed :p

Nowadays there are 10,000 servers with like 3 people in them and then I'm looking to coordinate mods, or am greeted by assburger mutes and some other mindf*cks in which case I give up and go back to SP...

[SnR 1]

Only if they could provide 24/7 admin presence on them. At the end of the day BI could only provide the same as whats out there now, due to A3's current state.

[sik 10]

There should be an addition to the server browser which shows server hardware performance and server internet connection performance (bandwidth, as ping is not everything).

So when somebody starts up a server a short bechmark should be run and the result should be visible in the server browser for everyone.

You also should be able to filter out low power server by filters. That way shitty servers won't get any attention and go offline.

Now it is very frustrating for new players as they think it is the game that is horribly optimized and not the low specs servers run by some users.

I will create a ticket on feedback tracker if I can't find one today.

EDIT: please vote http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=14683

Edited September 19, 2013 by sik
ticket created

[antoineflemming 14]

Honestly, if they could do it, I'd definitely want this. But they'd have to grow much larger, and have different studios in different countries. At the very least, a studio in both hemispheres.

[terox 316]

take a look at their official missions and then think about the quality of the gameplay you would get

also why would it be any different to the rest of the typical wasteland/domination./annex servers

Its the presence of good admins that makes these types of servers good to play on. Unfortunately the majority of servers dont have that, so all you get is disorganised chaos.

There is way more to Arma3 than these missions, you really need to look for a good server which are few and far between and for a mission that isnt named any of the above

Edited September 19, 2013 by Terox

[fa7h3r 10]

Agree with all your comments. I guess my point is that BI should put more effort in the quality control of the MP servers out there. Dedicated servers under their control that help others understand what is required to have a good MP experience in term of performance, and I actually like the idea to have more telemetry to the user to understand what servers are serious and what are just a PC in a basement running arma3server with not optimal configuration.

Same apply to missions as well i guess. I haven't found a server where at the end i want to return, and I'm not a wasteland player.

[zukov 490]

I'm been reading about how connecting to a wrong server can bring a very bad MP experience in term of performance (FPS). I personally have a great performance when playing scenarios and everything related to SP but I haven't spend much time in MP yet.

I wonder if BI should start supporting some official dedicated servers where they can guarantee from the server perspective everything is fine tuned and provide a more enjoyable experience. Many games does have initial official servers until they figure things out, tweak to provide optimal performance, etc. Then, they offer the options to support custom servers but now with more detail data on how to run it.

With Arma 3 and the fact that everyone can setup a server in even low performance machines, the probability to play in these bad servers is very high. BI should make some proactive work on getting some good servers by their own.

AHAHHAHHAHAHh ;) they don't give us not even a TDM or CTF mission and you try to ask a dedicated server

[simon1279 52]

AHAHHAHHAHAHh ;) they don't give us not even a TDM or CTF mission and you try to ask a dedicated server

under my point of view i'm happy because CTF and TDM are too CoD stile for my tastes and Arma engine, also hated these kind of gameplay in Arma 2, i believe the great deal with BIS, is there are no official server, you can make one yourself and with the mods you want and that's one of the greatest things in Arma

[scarecrow398 43]

Honestly, if they could do it, I'd definitely want this. But they'd have to grow much larger, and have different studios in different countries. At the very least, a studio in both hemispheres.

Uhh, why would they need a studio?

Setup server hosting in a couple of major countries (US, EU, RU and AU for example) then slowly bring in community members as admins and then have the BI people who are being payed as community managers to keep and eye on it every now and then to make sure it's running legitimatly...

[tonygrunt 10]

If they ever made official MP servers they would only run BI approved missions that clients would keep high frames, it would be a PR disaster otherwise.

So forget all the heavy missions that people are favoring right now. Don't think there would be enough interest.

[PuFu 4600]

no...5char

[terox 316]

An official DEV server would be of use to them.

It would be a nightmare to admin though and where would they get good missions from, its hardly politically correct for them to use 3rd party missions and their own missions don't cater for 40-50 players.

It may open there eyes up to what is actually needed though

[Seitan 8]

Has BIS actually ever said anything about recommended System requirements for server side ???

They should atleast do that if no official servers.

[gossamersolid 155]

Has BIS actually ever said anything about recommended System requirements for server side ???

They should atleast do that if no official servers.

- No less than 2 cores, Highest clock speed possible - 3.0Ghz+ Recommended

- Windows Server OS (Linux versions aren't available for A3 yet? Usually patched much further behind windows version, linux lacks callExtension support)

- 3GB Ram (Server can use up to 2.xGB I believe - 32 bit app)

- 100Mbit connection, the faster the better.

Somebody else can post some info if they'd like.

[Von Quest 1163]

YES! If BIS ran professional and good simulation-style capture-the-map/territory.

I'd pay a monthly subscription like EVE, Aces High II, etc. Sure, why not? :p

[vagabond985 0]

I honestly never understood why the ArmA series lacked official servers. To the guy saying that they need studios overseas.. that's so wrong. There's many crappy games out there with low budgets which offer they own public hosted servers. And don't tell me they BIS lack the money. seems like some of you aren't aware that they're a service provider to the almighty UNCLE SAM!! for Christ sake. VBS generate them a lot more profit then arma and i sometime wonder where and how game developers invest their money.

PS** not ranting on BIS, they're great but need to expend.

[bvrettski 10]

As much as running servers they need to write some good code for several large scale multiplayer gametypes instead of leaving all the gametypes to the playing community. The game should come canned with 4-6 good multiplayer games ready to host and designed for both the stratis and altius. Without them this is just a game engine and coop game.

If they really wanted to make a bigger dent they could have hosted server at release day then slowly reduced them in number over the next three months. They would have also had real world testbeds for all of the issues we have been seeing on performance, code optimization, low fps, physX issues , patches etc but instead they took the hands off approach and we have a poor performing, unstable game that will probably be just like A2...getting constant patches and fixes (like a beta) until they announce A4.

[beerhuntor 11]

It doesnt matter either way, as many units offer their own servers, only benefit would be that its guarenteed to be up 24/7 but there is enough dedicated around to not matter that much